Re: [Talk-it] Photo Red

[Francesco Pelullo]

Il sab 1 set 2018, 02:12 Martin Koppenhoefer  ha
scritto:

> Ecco una relazione, ho dovuto trovarla con overpass-api:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5568236
>
>
> È un po’ strana perché contiene anche il tag maxspeed.
> Secondo il wiki non si possono unire le relazioni traffic lights e
> maxspeed in una unica relazione:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:enforcement
>


Non è affatto strana. Il Wiki andrebbe corretto perché ne esistono molti in
Trentino Alto Adige ed in Austria.

Si tratta di semafori che si attivano al superamento del limite di
velocità, agiscono da dissuasori: il semaforo è perennemente in "giallo
lampeggiante" ma se un'auto che li approssima viaggia oltre il limite
consentito, si attiva e fa scattare il rosso, costringendo l'auto a stare
ferma qualche minuto.

Una specie di punizione per gli indisciplinati, ma comunque sempre meglio
di una foto alla targa.

Ciao
/niubii/
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.

[Evin Fairchild]

Yeah, I agree, it is redundant and thus completely unnecessary to put the
highway number in the name tag. Have you informed SSR_317 about this
discussion?



On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 7:09 PM Albert Pundt  wrote:

> I notice the user SSR_317 has been adding the route numbers of unnamed
> roads to the name=* tag of roads around Indianapolis. For example, 
> name=Interstate
> 465, name=US 31, name=State Route 37, etc. Isn't this practice frowned
> upon as being redundant and not reflecting the lack of a proper name to the
> road? This seems to be the case around the country. All route numbers were
> listed in alternate names of the roads in the original TIGER data, but the
> vast majority of these have been removed in favor of route relations and
> ref=* tags.
>
> I removed these name tags from the affected roads, but the user has since
> re-added them.
>
> —Albert Pundt
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [talk-au] Australia maritime boundaries - Geoscience Australia

[Andrew Davidson]

Yeap, maritime boundaries have been on my "todo list" for a while now. 
However, I was waiting for GA to release an updated dataset that will 
have the new boundaries arising from recent treaty negotiations with 
East Timor. I'd suggest waiting till then.


On 01/09/18 10:53, Lee Mason wrote:
Except for the territorial boundary, Australia’s maritime boundaries in 
OpenStreetMap are incomplete. I have found two potential data sources 
for import from Geoscience Australia. Both are CC-BY-4.0 and I believe 
the waiver for GSA covers these datasets, but I ask here to be 100% certain.


Link to the waiver:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:GeoscienceAustralia_CCBY_Waiver_EmailAcceptance.pdf

Includes boundaries of the exclusive economic zone, contiguous zone and 
territorial sea (already in map):


https://data.gov.au/dataset/seas-and-submerged-lands-act-1973-australian-maritime-boundaries-2014a-geodatabase

Includes coastal water boundaries:

https://data.gov.au/dataset/coastal-waters-state-territory-powers-act-1980-australian-maritime-boundaries-2014a-geodatabase

At present, state and territory admin borders in OSM (admin_level =4) 
extend out to Australia’s maritime territorial border (admin_level=2). 
It appears that the proper form would be to extend to coastal water 
limits instead.


Any import would be fairly straight forward, just needs to be carefully 
integrated with the existing state/territory boundaries and the recently 
imported marine parks of Commonwealth waters (which are within the EEZ, 
but outside of coastal waters).


Geoscience Australia has a useful list of maritime boundary definitions:

http://www.ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/marine/jurisdiction/maritime-boundary-definitions



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.

[Paul Johnson]

Yes, this is correct.  name=* is only the name.  Ideally, the ref=* tag
should be *supplemental* to a proper route relation at this point
(especially in Indiana, where I am aware of a *nine-way* concurrency,
something ref=* just doesn't handle very elegantly at all in even the
slightest stretch of the imagination.

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 9:08 PM Albert Pundt  wrote:

> I notice the user SSR_317 has been adding the route numbers of unnamed
> roads to the name=* tag of roads around Indianapolis. For example, 
> name=Interstate
> 465, name=US 31, name=State Route 37, etc. Isn't this practice frowned
> upon as being redundant and not reflecting the lack of a proper name to the
> road? This seems to be the case around the country. All route numbers were
> listed in alternate names of the roads in the original TIGER data, but the
> vast majority of these have been removed in favor of route relations and
> ref=* tags.
>
> I removed these name tags from the affected roads, but the user has since
> re-added them.
>
> —Albert Pundt
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Naming numbered roads as "State Route X", "Interstate X", etc.

[Albert Pundt]

I notice the user SSR_317 has been adding the route numbers of unnamed
roads to the name=* tag of roads around Indianapolis. For example,
name=Interstate
465, name=US 31, name=State Route 37, etc. Isn't this practice frowned upon
as being redundant and not reflecting the lack of a proper name to the
road? This seems to be the case around the country. All route numbers were
listed in alternate names of the roads in the original TIGER data, but the
vast majority of these have been removed in favor of route relations and
ref=* tags.

I removed these name tags from the affected roads, but the user has since
re-added them.

—Albert Pundt
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[talk-au] Australia maritime boundaries - Geoscience Australia

[Lee Mason]

Except for the territorial boundary, Australia’s maritime boundaries in 
OpenStreetMap are incomplete. I have found two potential data sources for 
import from Geoscience Australia. Both are CC-BY-4.0 and I believe the waiver 
for GSA covers these datasets, but I ask here to be 100% certain.

Link to the waiver:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:GeoscienceAustralia_CCBY_Waiver_EmailAcceptance.pdf

Includes boundaries of the exclusive economic zone, contiguous zone and 
territorial sea (already in map):
https://data.gov.au/dataset/seas-and-submerged-lands-act-1973-australian-maritime-boundaries-2014a-geodatabase

Includes coastal water boundaries:
https://data.gov.au/dataset/coastal-waters-state-territory-powers-act-1980-australian-maritime-boundaries-2014a-geodatabase

At present, state and territory admin borders in OSM (admin_level =4) extend 
out to Australia’s maritime territorial border (admin_level=2). It appears that 
the proper form would be to extend to coastal water limits instead.

Any import would be fairly straight forward, just needs to be carefully 
integrated with the existing state/territory boundaries and the recently 
imported marine parks of Commonwealth waters (which are within the EEZ, but 
outside of coastal waters).

Geoscience Australia has a useful list of maritime boundary definitions:
http://www.ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/marine/jurisdiction/maritime-boundary-definitions

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-it] Photo Red

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 31. Aug 2018, at 17:56, liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu 
>  wrote:
> 
> Ecco una relazione, ho dovuto trovarla con overpass-api:
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5568236

È un po’ strana perché contiene anche il tag maxspeed.
Secondo il wiki non si possono unire le relazioni traffic lights e maxspeed in 
una unica relazione:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:enforcement


Ciao, Martin ___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] Extend natural=shingle tag also for city stone areas.

[Warin]

On 01/09/18 04:12, Tomasz Wójcik wrote:
As we map different physical landcovers by eg. landuse=grass, 
landuse=forest

No. landuse=forest is for managed areas .. not for a general tree area.
use natural=wood (for the render).

I place additional tags with these land cover features

landuse=grass gets landcover=grass
natural=wood gets landcover=trees
natural=sand gets landcover=sand
and so on.

, natural=sand, natural=water etc. There is theoretically no tag for 
urban areas covered by little stones like on this photo:


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Miejsce_po_pierwszym_pomniku_Adama_Mickiewicza_w_Poznaniu.jpg

There is natural=scree tag, but is for mountain regions
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=scree

I think that natural=shingle is the nearest one tag for this feature 
and its meaning can be extend to include also little stone areas in 
cities. Creating a new tag would rather make a more mess than 
clarifying the situation.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dshingle

I would like to edit the wiki page for the tag above. Do you agree?

No.
If you don't want to use a tag that say what the area is used for but 
use a tag that says what is there ..
well landcover=gravel will do that. It will not render, but as a mapper 
you have indicated what is there. Over 400 uses of that in the data base.

.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-pt] Cálculo de trilho a partir de vários registos GPX de um mesmo trilho

[Nuno Pedrosa]

Olá!
No iPhone uso uma outra aplicação, o TraceMyTrack (
https://itunes.apple.com/pt/app/tracemytrack/id554944477?mt=8), mas o erro
associado à qualidade do GPS será provavelmente a mesma, seja qual fôr a
aplicação que uses.

Quanto a juntar vários trilhos num único com melhor qualidade, não conheço
nenhuma aplicação que o faça, com trilhos feitos em datas/horas diferentes,
que será o teu caso, certo?

Eu costumo ter dois receptores de GPS (iPhone e Garmin Quest) a funcionar
em simultâneo ao longo de um percurso. Como os tracks são feitos ao mesmo
tempo, é possível fazer a consolidação dos dois e no meu caso, uso o
GPSBabel.
Sinceramente, o resultado final não é sempre o melhor (os tracks
"dente-de-serra" são os mais "cómicos"), mas o meu objectivo é ter um track
único para georeferenciação de fotos e aí estou mais preocupado em ter um
track contínuo, do que em ter um track preciso.

Encontrei uma discussão do mesmo problema aqui:
http://forums.mtbr.com/gps-hrm-bike-computer/consolodate-many-gps-tracks-into-one-smoother-track-662911.html

e apesar de haver várias sugestões, a solução parece ser mesmo pegar num
conjunto de tracks abertos ao mesmo tempo sobre imagens de satélite e
desenhar à mão o track mais correcto.

Finalmente, para o iPhone, tens talvez uma outra alternativa, o Go Map!! (
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/go-map/id592990211).
Este permite-te adicionar dados ao OSM, na hora e offline. Podes
antecipadamente descarregar informação do OSM e imagens satélite para a
zona que queres explorar.
Portanto, a sugestão é:
- Descarregas a área que queres mapear para o Go Map!!
- Vais percorrer os trilhos, com alguma paciência.
- Ao marcar os pontos do trilho, ajustas manualmente de modo a compensar o
erro de GPS, recorrendo tanto às imagens de satélite, como ao terreno onde
estás.

Espero que isto ajude, ou melhor ainda, que alguém tenha soluções melhores!
:)

Nuno P.


2018-08-31 21:27 GMT+01:00 Manuel Menezes de Sequeira 
:

> Olá!
>
> Tenho como projecto registar vários trilhos antigos da Ilha das Flores.
> Para isso, tenho usado o AllTrails (recomendam outro?) no meu iPhone, mas a
> qualidade do GPS não é brilhante, além de que o terreno nas Flores é muito
> acidentado, pelo que cada registo GPS que faço de um trilho tem erros
> consideráveis. Há algum software que permita, com base em múltiplos
> registos (GPX, por exemplo) do *mesmo* trilho, obter um registo GPX do
> trilho de maior qualidade?
>
> Cumprimentos,
>
> Manuel
>
> ___
> Talk-pt mailing list
> Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt
>
>
___
Talk-pt mailing list
Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt

Re: [Talk-de] Genauigkeit der Gemeindegrenzen

[Michael Reichert]

Hallo,

Am 31.08.2018 um 23:01 schrieb Florian Groß:
> Also die vielen Gemeindegrenzen, die ich vor Jahren ein Baden-Württemberg
> eingetragen habe, sind sehr ungenau. Ich habe die Umrisse von Wikimedia
> geholt, nachbarbeitet und als Bild in josm unterlegt und dann abgemalt.

Es gab vor drei bis fünf Jahren in Baden-Württemberg einen "Import" aus
einem amtlichen Datensatz. Einer der aktiven Mapper war Benutzer
"seichter". Seitdem haben die Grenzen die Genauigkeit, die man mit der
verwendeten Transformation erreichen kann.

Viele Grüße

Michael

-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-cz] maperská minirecenze MI 8

[Jan Macura]

Ahoj,

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 17:29, jzvc  wrote:

> Cus, jako pockej maketingovej tah. Bud to je mozny (byt za nejakych
> idealnich podminek) nebo to mozny neni a pak je to podvod.
>

já si na to rád počkám, až to jednou fungovat bude :-) Ale ty s těmi soudy
taky počkej -- to není jako větvení v programu, kde podmínka buď je nebo
není splněna. To by se dalo ověřit jedině kontrolním měřením na mnoha
známých bodech. Určitě může existovat měření, který tý 30 cm přesnosti
dosáhne, na 99, % ale taky bude existovat větší množství měření, který
se do tý přesnosti nevejdou.

H.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] reportáž ČT o navigacích

[jzvc]

Dne 31.8.2018 v 22:36 Karel Volný napsal(a):

U nas by meli byt highway=track neroutovatelne, protoze na lesni a polni
cesty je vjezd ze zakona/vyhlasky zakazan.

[Citation needed]

podle kterýho zákona/vyhlášky nesmíš na polňačku?

co se lesa týče, vjezd motorovými vozidly do lesa je řešen v lesním zákoně
(289/1995), ale pokud jde o komunikaci v režimu podle 361/2000 (záleží na
místní situaci), tak tento zákaz nelze uplatnit (čti: když máš stromy nalevo i
napravo od D1, tak to neznamená, že se tam nesmí vjet a stát dle p. g) odst.
(1) §20 z. 289/1995, nýbrž pořád je to dálnice)

nějaký rozbor viz třeba

http://www.lesprace.cz/casopis-lesnicka-prace-archiv/rocnik-88-2009/lesnicka-prace-c-8-09/otazka-uzivani-lesnich-cest-jako-pozemnich-komunikaci


Pak jeste hromada vsemoznych eko zakonu(chraneny oblasti), vjezd na 
soukromy pozemek (pole) atd atd, ale defakto naprosto vzdy plati, ze 
pokud to vypada jako cesta a neni tam zakaz/zavora/..., tak tam proste 
vjet muzes, protoze telepatii po tobe (zatim) nikdo nechce. Ona totiz i 
soukroma cesta v narodnim parku muze byt verejnou komunikaci.





Takze bud by meli navigace prestat routovat track v CR nebo my vsude
nahazeme access, ale rozhodne to neni default pro cely svet.

jak již bylo řečeno, navigace mají obvykle nějakou volbu ve stylu "neroutovat
po nezpevněných cestách", čímž highway=track by default vypadnou (pravda,
vyšší grade jsou de facto zpevněné, ale pro tento účel se to tak nechápe)

pročež házet access tam, kde není explicitně definován, je IMO dost blbina

otázka routování objížděk a jiné výmysly navazující na yntelygency MD/ŘSD, pak
vyžaduje, máme-li být upřímní a pravdiví, takovou míru sprostoty hraničící s
nabádáním k trestnému činu, až to tento mailinglist není schopen unést :-(

ja jsem taky pro obnovu tradic ;D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiPKE6auR8A



K.


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz



___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-de] Genauigkeit der Gemeindegrenzen

[Tom Pfeifer]

Im Wiki steht: "Die Genauigkeit der Gemeindegrenzen in OSM ist regional sehr 
unterschiedlich."

Ist das nicht richtig? In Berlin sind wir komplett verwöhnt, weil wir den Senat an der kurzen Leine 
halten, und er uns mehr gibt was wir brauchen. Unter anderem Flurstücksbegrenzungsgenaue Grenzen.


Das mag in anderen Ländern anders sein.

tom

On 31.08.2018 21:55, Markus wrote:

Im Wiki wird die Genauigkeit (Lage und Form) er Gemeindegrenzen als sehr
begrenzt beschrieben, zuletzt 2014, und man solle doch die
Landesvermessungsämter fragen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Gemeindegrenze

Wie ist der aktuelle Stand?
Vielleicht kann man ja das Wiki aktualisieren?

Mit herzlichem Gruss,
Markus

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de




___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Genauigkeit der Gemeindegrenzen

[Florian Groß]

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 09:55:51PM +0200, Markus wrote:
> Im Wiki wird die Genauigkeit (Lage und Form) er Gemeindegrenzen als sehr
> begrenzt beschrieben, zuletzt 2014, und man solle doch die
> Landesvermessungsämter fragen:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Gemeindegrenze
> 
> Wie ist der aktuelle Stand?

Also die vielen Gemeindegrenzen, die ich vor Jahren ein Baden-Württemberg
eingetragen habe, sind sehr ungenau. Ich habe die Umrisse von Wikimedia
geholt, nachbarbeitet und als Bild in josm unterlegt und dann abgemalt.

flo


___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [OSM-talk] Extend natural=shingle tag also for city stone areas.

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 31. Aug 2018, at 21:09, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> 
> example: If this is a walkable area (likely since it is easily 
> accessible and there are no signs forbidding it apparently) it would 
> probably be highway=pedestrian + surface=gravel/pebbles.


+1 (and area=yes obviously)


> 
> If it is not walkable it would be more like a japanese rock garden so 
> you could use leisure=garden + garden:style=rock_garden.


+0.7 it’s a bit a stretch to call this a garden, as it is not exactly the same 
as a japanese rock garden. There’s no tradition of rock gardens in Europe 
AFAIK, so the ones that are there are usually imitations of japanese gardens 



> 
> What you are suggesting here is essentially like the old mapping for the 
> renderer habit of tagging sand bunkers on golf courses natural=beach.  
> It would degrade the quality of the data of what is tagged 
> natural=shingle which fortunately at the moment is pretty good


completely agree, the tag is not applicable at all, -1 to changing the wiki as 
proposed by the OP

Generally, this is clearly a tagging question and would better be discussed on 
the tagging ml.

Cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-cz] GPS-presnost

[Jan Macura]

Ahoj,

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 14:11, r00t  wrote:

> Je potreba rozlisovat rozdilne metody mereni:
> 1) (...)
> 2) (...)
> 3) (...)
>

to dělení určitě jde sepsat různě. Ani tohle není kompletní výčet všech
možností, které GNSS nabízí.
Poupravil bych, že ani měření na všech 5 vlnách vysílaných z GPS nepomůže v
modelování vlivu troposféry, protože ta ovlivňuje všechny frekvence cca
stejně (na rozdíl od ionosféry, ve které se rozdílné frekvence prodlužují
různě, jak už mě v téhle nebo v té druhé diskusi někdo správně opravil
(nějak se to rozjelo :-O )). Vliv troposféry jde eliminovat právě a jenom
diferenciálními GPS metodami.

H.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] reportáž ČT o navigacích

[Karel Volný]

> U nas by meli byt highway=track neroutovatelne, protoze na lesni a polni
> cesty je vjezd ze zakona/vyhlasky zakazan.

[Citation needed]

podle kterýho zákona/vyhlášky nesmíš na polňačku?

co se lesa týče, vjezd motorovými vozidly do lesa je řešen v lesním zákoně 
(289/1995), ale pokud jde o komunikaci v režimu podle 361/2000 (záleží na 
místní situaci), tak tento zákaz nelze uplatnit (čti: když máš stromy nalevo i 
napravo od D1, tak to neznamená, že se tam nesmí vjet a stát dle p. g) odst. 
(1) §20 z. 289/1995, nýbrž pořád je to dálnice)

nějaký rozbor viz třeba

http://www.lesprace.cz/casopis-lesnicka-prace-archiv/rocnik-88-2009/lesnicka-prace-c-8-09/otazka-uzivani-lesnich-cest-jako-pozemnich-komunikaci

> Takze bud by meli navigace prestat routovat track v CR nebo my vsude
> nahazeme access, ale rozhodne to neni default pro cely svet.

jak již bylo řečeno, navigace mají obvykle nějakou volbu ve stylu "neroutovat 
po nezpevněných cestách", čímž highway=track by default vypadnou (pravda, 
vyšší grade jsou de facto zpevněné, ale pro tento účel se to tak nechápe)

pročež házet access tam, kde není explicitně definován, je IMO dost blbina

otázka routování objížděk a jiné výmysly navazující na yntelygency MD/ŘSD, pak 
vyžaduje, máme-li být upřímní a pravdiví, takovou míru sprostoty hraničící s 
nabádáním k trestnému činu, až to tento mailinglist není schopen unést :-(

K.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-it] dataset MISE distributori

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Dal 28 agosto ogni gestore deve compilare il dorm del mise


Il 31 ago 2018 12:01 PM, "Martin Koppenhoefer"  ha
scritto:

2018-08-31 10:40 GMT+02:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> Tra l'altro, con una query overpass, potete trovare i distributori che non
> sono nel database del MISE (non hanno il tag ref:mise). In OSM ho trovato
> impianti chiusi e smantellati da anni.
>


hai trovato anche impianti che mancavano nel db MISE? Io ho controllato 2 e
di 1 non sono sicuro, dell'altro invece sono sicuro che esiste nella
realtà: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4772246944

Ciao,
Martin


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Utente veneziano che basa il lavoro su streetview

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

non lo conosce nessuno?

sent from a phone

> On 31. Aug 2018, at 13:58, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> 
> Nel contesto di una discussione su un changeset, ho incontrato un utente che 
> dice di basare il lavoro su Google StreetView.
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/50453873
> 
> Come si procede? Non credo tutto il suo lavoro sia stato basato su 
> streetview, per esempio il changeset che non mi piaceva era un edit 
> automatico che trasformava alcuni footway a Venezia in pedestrian.
> 
> Ciao,
> Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-pt] Cálculo de trilho a partir de vários registos GPX de um mesmo trilho

[Manuel Menezes de Sequeira]

Olá!

Tenho como projecto registar vários trilhos antigos da Ilha das Flores.
Para isso, tenho usado o AllTrails (recomendam outro?) no meu iPhone, mas a
qualidade do GPS não é brilhante, além de que o terreno nas Flores é muito
acidentado, pelo que cada registo GPS que faço de um trilho tem erros
consideráveis. Há algum software que permita, com base em múltiplos
registos (GPX, por exemplo) do *mesmo* trilho, obter um registo GPX do
trilho de maior qualidade?

Cumprimentos,

Manuel
___
Talk-pt mailing list
Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt

Re: [Talk-cz] PhotoDB

[Jan Macura]

Ahoj,

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 18:29, Tom Ka  wrote:

> Ahoj, nahravani na Commons zrejme nebude rozumne realizovatelne. Pokud
> je mi zatim znamo, Commons musi mit CC0, coz zase neni idealni pro
> PhotoDB2, i kdyz o licenci pro PhotoDB2 jeste bude zrejme diskuze.
>

vůbec ne. Na Commons má každý soubor licenci individuálně. Určitě by se
nechala vytáhnout nějaká statistika, ale většina zřejmě pod bude CC-BY-SA,
což je defaultní (a nejrestriktivnější) možnost. Potom bych tipnul CC-BY,
PD-GOV a pak ostatní...

H.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-de] Genauigkeit der Gemeindegrenzen

[Markus]

Im Wiki wird die Genauigkeit (Lage und Form) er Gemeindegrenzen als sehr
begrenzt beschrieben, zuletzt 2014, und man solle doch die
Landesvermessungsämter fragen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Gemeindegrenze

Wie ist der aktuelle Stand?
Vielleicht kann man ja das Wiki aktualisieren?

Mit herzlichem Gruss,
Markus

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-cz] PhotoDB

[xkomc...@centrum.cz]

Kdepak, Commons bere i CC-BY-SA licence (těch bude, řekl bych, většina).


On 31.8.2018 18:28, Tom Ka wrote:

Ahoj, nahravani na Commons zrejme nebude rozumne realizovatelne. Pokud
je mi zatim znamo, Commons musi mit CC0, coz zase neni idealni pro
PhotoDB2, i kdyz o licenci pro PhotoDB2 jeste bude zrejme diskuze.

Bye

Dne 31. srpna 2018 10:15 Jiří Sedláček  napsal(a):

Nebo to aspoň nahrávat pod kompatibilní licencí, aby to případně šlo nahrát
i na commons, ideálně hromadně.

J.

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:09 AM Jan Macura  wrote:

Ahoj,

pro fotky nádražních budov, vysílačů i mostů je jistě místo na Commons ;-)
Nepřijde mi efektivní duplikovat ty fotografie ve PhotoDB, pokud se
nenajde nějaká přidaná hodnota.

H.


On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 11:02, Mikoláš Štrajt  wrote:

Zdar,
na dovolené jsem pilně fotil rozcestníky (a taky mosty, vysílače na
kopcích, nádražní budovy a vůbec všechno okolo).

Včera večer jsem jeden rozcestník zkoušel nahrát, ale nejsem si úplně
jistej, zda jsem to udělal dobře.

Proto se ptám: Kde je nějaká up-to date dokumentace PhotoDB? (Jako co
můžu nahrávat, jak mám správně spárovat rozcestník v OSM a ve PhotoDB...)

Wiki stránka o sobě hrdě tvrdí, že je zastaralá...

Mimochodem jak to vypadá s vývojem PhotoDB2? Používá se už někde?

--
Severák


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz



--
S pozdravem,
Jirka Sedláček
---
jirisedla...@gmail.com

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz



___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [OSM-talk] Extend natural=shingle tag also for city stone areas.

[Christoph Hormann]

(Note:  since this is a tagging question this is in a way the wrong 
group).

On Friday 31 August 2018, Tomasz Wc3b3jcik wrote:
> As we map different physical landcovers by eg. landuse=grass,
> landuse=forest, natural=sand, natural=water etc. There is
> theoretically no tag for urban areas covered by little stones like on
> this photo:
>
> ]...]

Urban area mapping in OSM is primarily functional - in case of your 
example: If this is a walkable area (likely since it is easily 
accessible and there are no signs forbidding it apparently) it would 
probably be highway=pedestrian + surface=gravel/pebbles.

If it is not walkable it would be more like a japanese rock garden so 
you could use leisure=garden + garden:style=rock_garden.

What you are suggesting here is essentially like the old mapping for the 
renderer habit of tagging sand bunkers on golf courses natural=beach.  
It would degrade the quality of the data of what is tagged 
natural=shingle which fortunately at the moment is pretty good (since 
it is a relatively young tag documented precisely from the beginning 
and rendered in a way that supports correct use).  So no, i would be 
strongly against extending natural=shingle to urban areas artificially 
covered with loose stones based on a physical similarity.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] strada minore o strada ad uso agricolo

[matteo ruffoni]

su OSM risulta ancora un pezzo di tratteggio marrone (strada agricola) ma
la via Alta è tutta asfaltata (strada non classificata)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/46.0161/10.7185
Ho provato ad entrare per modificare ma nella modifica risulta già tutta
strada, meglio se fa chi è più esperto di me.
La strada è tutta asfaltata e percorribile in auto in entrambi i sensi, ma
è stretta
La cosa interessante però è per chi va in bici come me, la strada non pone
mai problemi, i sentieri o le strade agricole invece vanno percorse per
capire in che condizioni sono


Il giorno gio 30 ago 2018 alle ore 23:50 Volker Schmidt 
ha scritto:

> Ho guardato un attimo.
> Ho visto che ci sono foto Mapillary  (di quattro giorni fa) sulla parte
> verso Bondo. Mi sono permesso di corregere geometria dalle tracce GPX e
> tagging dalle foto. Ho aggiunto una strada mancante a sud di Zuclo.
> Guarda un attimo se non ho commessi grossi errori. La geometria in
> dettaglio nel bosco è difficile stabilire - le tracce GPX non convergono
> bene.
>
> Volker
>
>
> 2018-08-30 16:41 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
>>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>> > On 30. Aug 2018, at 15:40, Francesco Pelullo 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Scusa, non sono d'accordo.
>> > Se è "marrone" cioè è una highway=track basta aggiungere la chiave
>> tracktype=1
>>
>>
>> forse. Non abbiamo proprio le informazioni sufficienti per deciderlo.
>> Potrei cercare i luoghi sulla mappa e provare di capire quale percorso è
>> inteso, ma sarebbe meglio postare direttamente un link alla strada qui.
>>
>> C’è segnaletica? È classificata/chi fa la manutenzione ? Ci devono andare
>> tutti su quella strada o ci sono alternative? etc.
>>
>> Ciao,
>> Martin
>> ___
>> Talk-it mailing list
>> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[OSM-talk] Extend natural=shingle tag also for city stone areas.

[Tomasz Wójcik]

As we map different physical landcovers by eg. landuse=grass, 
landuse=forest, natural=sand, natural=water etc. There is theoretically 
no tag for urban areas covered by little stones like on this photo:


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Miejsce_po_pierwszym_pomniku_Adama_Mickiewicza_w_Poznaniu.jpg

There is natural=scree tag, but is for mountain regions
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=scree

I think that natural=shingle is the nearest one tag for this feature and 
its meaning can be extend to include also little stone areas in cities. 
Creating a new tag would rather make a more mess than clarifying the 
situation.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dshingle

I would like to edit the wiki page for the tag above. Do you agree?___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-cz] PhotoDB

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj, nahravani na Commons zrejme nebude rozumne realizovatelne. Pokud
je mi zatim znamo, Commons musi mit CC0, coz zase neni idealni pro
PhotoDB2, i kdyz o licenci pro PhotoDB2 jeste bude zrejme diskuze.

Bye

Dne 31. srpna 2018 10:15 Jiří Sedláček  napsal(a):
> Nebo to aspoň nahrávat pod kompatibilní licencí, aby to případně šlo nahrát
> i na commons, ideálně hromadně.
>
> J.
>
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:09 AM Jan Macura  wrote:
>>
>> Ahoj,
>>
>> pro fotky nádražních budov, vysílačů i mostů je jistě místo na Commons ;-)
>> Nepřijde mi efektivní duplikovat ty fotografie ve PhotoDB, pokud se
>> nenajde nějaká přidaná hodnota.
>>
>> H.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 11:02, Mikoláš Štrajt  wrote:
>>>
>>> Zdar,
>>> na dovolené jsem pilně fotil rozcestníky (a taky mosty, vysílače na
>>> kopcích, nádražní budovy a vůbec všechno okolo).
>>>
>>> Včera večer jsem jeden rozcestník zkoušel nahrát, ale nejsem si úplně
>>> jistej, zda jsem to udělal dobře.
>>>
>>> Proto se ptám: Kde je nějaká up-to date dokumentace PhotoDB? (Jako co
>>> můžu nahrávat, jak mám správně spárovat rozcestník v OSM a ve PhotoDB...)
>>>
>>> Wiki stránka o sobě hrdě tvrdí, že je zastaralá...
>>>
>>> Mimochodem jak to vypadá s vývojem PhotoDB2? Používá se už někde?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Severák
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-cz mailing list
>>> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-cz mailing list
>> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
>
>
> --
> S pozdravem,
> Jirka Sedláček
> ---
> jirisedla...@gmail.com
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] reportáž ČT o navigacích

[Marek]

Zkusil jsem ti trasu z Černého dolu do Janských lázní a mě to nevede přes 
národní park. Navigace Magic Eerth Navigation.

Marek Polák


Dne 31.8.2018 v 15:08 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):

... neroutovatelne, protoze na lesni a polni
cesty je vjezd ze zakona/vyhlasky zakazan. Ovsem rozlisit to lze dost
tezko - viz nedavne diskuze zde ...


A jak poznas v terenu, ze jde o lesni cestu, kdyz je to asfaltka a neni
tam zadna znacka?  Nijak, takze na ni normalne vjet muzes. A pokud tam
znacka je, mela by byt i v datech osm. Navic v CR mame pomerne
vyjimecnej stav, ze je drtiva vetsina verejnych komunikaci asfaltovych,
to neni pravidlem ani na zapad od nas.

Pokud sem si vsim, vetsina navigaci tohle ma jako extra nastaveni, ktery
je bydefault vypnuty, protoze po typicky polnacce vazne jezdit nechces.

Mimochodem, videli jste toho mamlase Toka jak si potrasa rukou s
provozovatelem nezakonne umistenych bilboardu? Ono je totiz straasne
slozity vzit flexu a behem minuty to skacet (a dotycnymu to obratem dat
k uhrade). Uplne stejne to pak vypada s opravama, kde se cely dny i
tydny nic nedeje, ale silnice je uzavrena, a pak brecej, ze si ridici
najdou jinou cestu.


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz




___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-it] Mancata attribuzione osm

[Riccardo Usardi]

Ciao a tutti,
stavo cercando un'impresa e son finito su questo sito:
https://www.coobiz.it/
ho notato che manca l'attribuzione a osm sulla mappa leaflat della pagina
di tutte le imprese :
es https://www.coobiz.it/azienda/modena-adwords-seo/co9382021

ovviamente in home usano una mappa google che è attribuita correttamente
con anche il link "termini e condizioni d'uso"
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-us] NYC Name Vandalism

[Richard Welty]

On 8/31/18 5:58 AM, Rihards wrote:
>
> It gives us the same press as some vandals messing with wikipedia -
> let's not see it as a worse thing than it is.
>
> As a sidenote, this was detected and revert in OSM in a day. If data
> consumers would update the data more frequently, the impact would be
> much, much smaller (in this specific case, probably nobody would have
> noticed).
update frequency is a real issue. i recently encountered issues with
outdated maps in an OSM based GPS application, and when i went
to edit, found that someone was keeping all the new construction
at WDW in Orlando up to date - it was just that the GPS app wasn't
pulling new maps frequently enough to keep up with reality.

richard

-- 
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-it] Photo Red

[claudio62PG]

liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu wrote
> Il 31/08/2018 17:12, claudio62PG ha scritto:
>> ho trovato  questo
>> http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Problemi-Lanes-photored-frontisti-ztl-td5724294.html#a5724301;
>> post
>> ma non mi è chiaro
>> come taggarlo infatti
>> un Photo Red non è una telecaemera di sorveglianza,
>> non è un autovelox, no posso taggarlo come un indicatore di velocità
>> è una fotocamera che scatta quando si passa con il rosso.
>> Posso dire che non esiste un tag?
>> Ciao
>> Claudio
>> 
> 
> 
> Questa l'avevi vista[0]? non è completamente tradotta ma su 
> Blitzermap[1], trovi esempi taggati, per esempio questo mi sembra 
> taggato bene[2] (visto a caso in zone poco distanti dalle mie, con 
> simbolo evidente).
> 
> 
> [0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Relation:enforcement
> 
> [1] http://frink.bplaced.de/blitzer/
> 
> [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7824375
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> _|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
> |_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
> Simone Girardelli
> 
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list

> Talk-it@

> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

il 2 mi sembra un autovelox
più che un Photo red

questo mi sembra meglio
Checking if vehicles enter a crossing at redlight
Relation

type=enforcement

enforcement=traffic_signals
 o sbaglio
Claudio



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Photo Red

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

Il 31/08/2018 17:46, liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu ha scritto:


Questa l'avevi vista[0]? non è completamente tradotta ma su 
Blitzermap[1], trovi esempi taggati, per esempio questo mi sembra 
taggato bene[2] (visto a caso in zone poco distanti dalle mie, con 
simbolo evidente).



[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Relation:enforcement

[1] http://frink.bplaced.de/blitzer/

[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7824375






Il valore è traffic_signals.


Ecco una relazione, ho dovuto trovarla con overpass-api:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5568236



--
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] un-named roads in UK

[Andy Mabbett]

On 30 August 2018 at 10:58, Simon Poole  wrote:

> I can't speak specifically for the UK, but in general I would not consider 
> google of
> any use at all for determining if a road has a name or not.

Potential licensing issues notwithstanding, it's often possible to
read street name signs in Google Streetview.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-it] Photo Red

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

Il 31/08/2018 17:46, liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu ha scritto:
Questa l'avevi vista[0]? non è completamente tradotta ma su 
Blitzermap[1], trovi esempi taggati, per esempio questo mi sembra 
taggato bene[2] (visto a caso in zone poco distanti dalle mie, con 
simbolo evidente).



[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Relation:enforcement

[1] http://frink.bplaced.de/blitzer/

[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7824375





Lascia perdere ho trovato l'esempio sbagliato, scusa.



--
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] reportáž ČT o navigacích

[jzvc]

Dne 31.8.2018 v 15:08 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):

... neroutovatelne, protoze na lesni a polni
cesty je vjezd ze zakona/vyhlasky zakazan. Ovsem rozlisit to lze dost
tezko - viz nedavne diskuze zde ...


A jak poznas v terenu, ze jde o lesni cestu, kdyz je to asfaltka a neni 
tam zadna znacka?  Nijak, takze na ni normalne vjet muzes. A pokud tam 
znacka je, mela by byt i v datech osm. Navic v CR mame pomerne 
vyjimecnej stav, ze je drtiva vetsina verejnych komunikaci asfaltovych, 
to neni pravidlem ani na zapad od nas.


Pokud sem si vsim, vetsina navigaci tohle ma jako extra nastaveni, ktery 
je bydefault vypnuty, protoze po typicky polnacce vazne jezdit nechces.


Mimochodem, videli jste toho mamlase Toka jak si potrasa rukou s 
provozovatelem nezakonne umistenych bilboardu? Ono je totiz straasne 
slozity vzit flexu a behem minuty to skacet (a dotycnymu to obratem dat 
k uhrade). Uplne stejne to pak vypada s opravama, kde se cely dny i 
tydny nic nedeje, ale silnice je uzavrena, a pak brecej, ze si ridici 
najdou jinou cestu.



___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-it] Photo Red

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

Il 31/08/2018 17:12, claudio62PG ha scritto:

ho trovato  questo

post
ma non mi è chiaro
come taggarlo infatti
un Photo Red non è una telecaemera di sorveglianza,
non è un autovelox, no posso taggarlo come un indicatore di velocità
è una fotocamera che scatta quando si passa con il rosso.
Posso dire che non esiste un tag?
Ciao
Claudio




Questa l'avevi vista[0]? non è completamente tradotta ma su 
Blitzermap[1], trovi esempi taggati, per esempio questo mi sembra 
taggato bene[2] (visto a caso in zone poco distanti dalle mie, con 
simbolo evidente).



[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Relation:enforcement

[1] http://frink.bplaced.de/blitzer/

[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7824375



--
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] maperská minirecenze MI 8

[jzvc]

Dne 29.8.2018 v 23:47 Jan Macura napsal(a):

Ahoj,

On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 at 09:30, majka > wrote:


On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 23:37, Jan Macura mailto:macura...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Zrychlení fixu by měl být logický důsledek většího množství
viditelných satelitů.


Ale tak nějak ne důsledek jediný...


Jestli věříš, že důsledkem bude i zpřesnění polohy, tak nečekej 
zázraky. Mělo by se tím zlepšit to, že poloha bude méně často lítat o 
stovky metrů do háje, protože přijímač má na výběr z většího množství 
satelitů, tím pádem se nemusí spolíhat zrovna na ten, co je 10° nad 
obzorem, a taky dokáže snáz vyloučit hrubý chyby jako multipath.
Absolutní určení polohy se tím ale o moc nezlepší. Nezlepší se tím 
totiž ani chod hodin, ani se nezmenší vlivy troposféry a ionosféry na 
signál. A tyhle 3 faktory jsou největší kazisvěti pro GNSS měření. 
Těch 30 cm, co avizuje Xiaomi je medle čistě marketingový tah. V 
současnosti ani v nejbližší budoucnosti se mobily ani ostatní běžné 
přijímače pod 1 m přesnost nedostanou.
Cus, jako pockej maketingovej tah. Bud to je mozny (byt za nejakych 
idealnich podminek) nebo to mozny neni a pak je to podvod.




H.


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz



___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-it] Photo Red

[claudio62PG]

ho trovato  questo

  
post
ma non mi è chiaro
come taggarlo infatti
un Photo Red non è una telecaemera di sorveglianza,
non è un autovelox, no posso taggarlo come un indicatore di velocità
è una fotocamera che scatta quando si passa con il rosso.
Posso dire che non esiste un tag?
Ciao
Claudio 




--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] un-named roads in UK

[Mark Goodge]

On 31/08/2018 15:30, Steve Doerr wrote:

On 30/08/2018 22:26, Mark Goodge wrote:
It was incredibly confusing to visitors, as the hamlet was nowhere 
near the post town. So we inserted "near [parish name]" as the second 
line, when giving the address. 



Off-topic, but the Royal Mail have long discouraged the use of 'Near', 
but they do allow the use of 'Via'.


I know. But they're not equivalent. Just because a location is "near" a 
named place, that does not make it necessary or desirable to travel 
"via" that place to get there. And, since the problem is created by 
Royal Mail's suboptimal approach to postal addresses in rural areas, we 
didn't feel in any way obliged to follow their preferences in the 
matter. The post always got to us anyway; it was non-RM deliveries that 
were the issue.


These days, of course, it wouldn't really matter. Nobody uses the full 
postal address to locate a destination, they just plug the postcode into 
their satnav or other mapping application and then just use the street 
part of the address for the final leg if necessary.


Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-es] [geoinquietos-es] Reunión/Actividad/es comunidad OSM España en Geocamp ES (MAD

[Santiago Crespo]

Hola, contad conmigo.

Puedo moderar la reunión o tomar el acta si queréis.

Saludos,
Santiago Crespo

On 08/30/2018 06:43 PM, Miguel Sevilla-Callejo wrote:
> Hola,
> 
> Vuelvo a la carga para concretar el tema de realizar una reunión de la
> comunidad española de OSM aprovechando la celebración de la Geocamp 2018
> que se llevará a cabo en Madrid el 20 y posiblemente también el 21 de
> Octubre.
> 
> Os paso la web del evento y en breve os pondré la dirección del meetup
> para apuntarse: http://2018.geocamp.es/
> 
> Me he tomado la libertad de ir moviendo este tema dentr ode la Geocamp
> pero cualquier ayuda será bienvenida. Lo estamos moviendo por el GitHub
> en esta dirección: https://github.com/geocamp-es/2018/issues/2
> 
> Sería bueno ir diciendo quién va a venir... ¿cuento con los madrileños
> al menos?
> 
> Volveré a insistir
> 
> Un saludo
> 
> M
> 
> --
> *Miguel Sevilla-Callejo*
> Doctor en Geografía
> 
> 
> On Fri, 18 May 2018 at 16:59, Santiago Crespo  > wrote:
> 
> Gracias Miguel, me parece una iniciativa muy buena.
> 
> Nos vemos en octubre entonces, o cuando sea la Geocamp.
> 
> Saludos,
> Santiago Crespo
> 
> On 05/18/2018 02:08 PM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
> > Ojo que la fecha y lugar no están cerrados, vamos que seguro no va
> a ser en
> > MediaLab (ni Google Campus)
> >
> > https://github.com/geocamp-es/2018/issues/1
> >
> > En cuanto tengamos lugar y fecha os avisamos
> > On Fri, 18 May 2018 at 10:31, Miguel Sevilla-Callejo
> mailto:msevill...@gmail.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hola (copio a listas de OSM/Talk-es y a geoinquietos),
> >
> >> A la vista de algunos desencuentros y malentendidos uqe ha habido
> dentro
> > de la comunidad de OSM España y ante la necesidad acuciante de
> vernos las
> > caras de una vez para relanzar algunos aspectos organizativos de
> la propia
> > comunidad, se me ocurrió que podríamos aprovechar para vernos en la
> > "desconferencia" de la Geocamp-ES [1] que se celebrará en Madrid
> (MediaLab
> > Prado) los pŕoximos 20 y 21 de octubre, que organiza Geoinquietos
> Madrid y
> > en la que asistiremos personas doblemente implicados en este
> movimiento
> > "geo" y en la comunidad OSM.
> >
> >> Se ha creado un github para la organización del evento y he tenido la
> > osadía de abrir un "issue" sobre el tema de alguna
> actividad/reunión/lo que
> > se tercie de la comunidad OMS:
> >
> >> https://github.com/geocamp-es/2018/issues/2
> >
> >> Como veréis solo está la idea, pero la cosa es, seǵun las ganas,
> hacer
> > una pequeña reunión, algún taller o lo que se tercie, en la línea
> de la
> > geocamp.
> >
> >> ¿Cómo lo veis? ¿Nos vemos en octubre en Madrid? A buen seguro nos
> viene
> > bien vernos las caras, desvirtualizarnos y compartir más que
> conversaciones
> > de mensajería instantánea o correos electrónicos.
> >
> >> Un saludo
> >
> >> Miguel
> >
> >
> >> [1] De la web http://2013.geocamp.es/ --> Un Geocamp es una
> > geo-desconferencia, un evento en el que todos los participantes
> toman un
> > papel más activo dentro de la creación del evento. Tiene su origen
> en el
> > concepto Barcamp. Es un día para el intercambio de experiencias,
> > conocimientos y valores en torno a todo aquello que tenga que ver
> con lo
> > GEO y no tan GEO
> >
> >> --
> >> Miguel Sevilla-Callejo
> >> Doctor en Geografía
> >> ___
> >> geoinquietos-es mailing list
> >> geoinquietos...@lists.osgeo.org
> 
> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoinquietos-es
> >
> >
> >
> 
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
> 

___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-GB] un-named roads in UK

[Steve Doerr]

On 30/08/2018 22:26, Mark Goodge wrote:
It was incredibly confusing to visitors, as the hamlet was nowhere 
near the post town. So we inserted "near [parish name]" as the second 
line, when giving the address. 



Off-topic, but the Royal Mail have long discouraged the use of 'Near', 
but they do allow the use of 'Via'.



--

Steve


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] un-named roads in UK

[Steve Doerr]

On 30/08/2018 17:40, Ed Loach wrote:


I missed the start of this thread as I was away, but there are some 
unnamed roads in England with houses on that just have a postal 
address in the format


house name, hamlet name, parish name, postal town

or at least there is the one where I commented on this note:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1390266

for this way

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26465561



Referred to as Ravens Green Lane in this Historic England listing: 
https://www.historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1147155



Ordnance Survey doesn't seem to give it a name though.


--

Steve



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-cz] reportáž ČT o navigacích

[majka]

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 15:09, Miroslav Suchý  wrote:

> Dne 31.8.2018 v 14:34 Jan Sten Adámek napsal(a):
> > U nás by měla být navigovatelná i autem (např. různé příjezdy k chatám),
> > takže pokud tam auta explicitně nesmí, chyba je spíš v chybějícím access
> > než v navigaci.
>
> To je otázka. Příjezd k chate by mel byt znacen highway=service s
> prislusnym surface= (gravel nebo ground).
>
> U nas by meli byt highway=track neroutovatelne, protoze na lesni a polni
> cesty je vjezd ze zakona/vyhlasky zakazan. Ovsem rozlisit to lze dost
> tezko - viz nedavne diskuze zde (polni cesta v obci nemuze existovat,
> nebo asfaltove lesni cesty v lese).
>
> Ovsem v takove africe je highway=track uplne luxusni cesta pro 4WD a
> mela by byt routovatelna. A pred pul rokem ji Maps.me urcite neroutovalo
> (pro mne, bohuzel).
>
> Takze bud by meli navigace prestat routovat track v CR nebo my vsude
> nahazeme access, ale rozhodne to neni default pro cely svet.
>

Průser je, že default nebere žádná navigace, pokud je specifický pro danou
zemi.

Druhý průser je, že osobně netuším, jak u některých cest na místě odlišit,
kdy se jedná o highway=track,  highway=service nebo highway=unclassified.
Všechno tohle totiž může vypadat opticky naprosto stejně, pokud není
označeno navíc značkami či jinak uzavřeno a nevidím tomu konec. Navíc jsem
(možná nesprávně) přesvědčená, že "polní / lesní cesta" je účelová
komunikace jako každá jiná. Vjezd je tam dovolen, pokud to není v uzavřeném
areálu nebo zakázáno jinak (značkami / vyhláškou obce / kraje).

Navíc v těchhle třech kategoriích (track/service/unclassified + residential
v obcích) máme bordel v datech.
Pod heslem "kovářova kobyla chodí bosa" jsem si všimla až tenhle týden, že
aktivní mapper před pár lety změnil všechny "highway=residential" o šířce
jednoho pruhu v naší obci na "highway=service". Pravda to samozřejmě není,
je to stejná ulice jako všechny ostatní, jen tam zkrátka scházela ta šířka
a povrch je tam standardně rozbitý asfalt nebo betonové panely. Navigace si
to přitom občas usnadňují a highway=service berou jako access=destination.

V menších obcích (spíš osadách) je i hlavní průjezdová komunikace (podle mě
unclassified) označená jako track, ačkoli nikam do pole či lesa nevede,
normálně jde z jednoho většího města přes tyhle vesničky / osady / ... do
druhého většího města, případně dokonce spojuje dvě okresní města. Nechci
napadat Pražáky, ale připadá mi to jako promítání do dat jejich představy o
tom, jak by jaká kategorie silnic měla vypadat ;) Přitom stačí zajet na náš
"divoký jih" a nestačili by se divit.

Osobně bych "track" považovala v Čechách za routovatelné, jen s tím, že
bych tam (pokud není jinak označeno + chybí tracktype) předpokládala
nezpevněný povrch. Přístup bych opravdu výslovně omezovala přes access.

Majka
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] reportáž ČT o navigacích

[Jan Martinec]

Ahoj,

Co jsem tak koukal do OSMAndu třeba, tak má routování pro auta po
highway=track defaultně vypnutý. Masové tagování track 》access=no vidím
jako horší řešení než problém.

Jinak vítr možná fouká odtud:
https://auto.idnes.cz/waze-google-dynamicka-navigace-kolona-zacpa-kapacita-trasa-pn7-/automoto.aspx?c=A180822_141659_automoto_fdv
(ŘSD si před volbami stěžuje, jak zlí zlí řidiči jezdí po trojkách a
polňačkách, než by vděčně stáli v jejich kolonách na jedničkách a dálnicích
- "před minulými volbami naslibované zlepšení nenastalo, tak teď budeme
mocně skuhrat, ať to zamaskujeme")



Dne pá 31. 8. 2018 15:09 uživatel Miroslav Suchý  napsal:

> Dne 31.8.2018 v 14:34 Jan Sten Adámek napsal(a):
> > U nás by měla být navigovatelná i autem (např. různé příjezdy k chatám),
> > takže pokud tam auta explicitně nesmí, chyba je spíš v chybějícím access
> > než v navigaci.
>
> To je otázka. Příjezd k chate by mel byt znacen highway=service s
> prislusnym surface= (gravel nebo ground).
>
> U nas by meli byt highway=track neroutovatelne, protoze na lesni a polni
> cesty je vjezd ze zakona/vyhlasky zakazan. Ovsem rozlisit to lze dost
> tezko - viz nedavne diskuze zde (polni cesta v obci nemuze existovat,
> nebo asfaltove lesni cesty v lese).
>
> Ovsem v takove africe je highway=track uplne luxusni cesta pro 4WD a
> mela by byt routovatelna. A pred pul rokem ji Maps.me urcite neroutovalo
> (pro mne, bohuzel).
>
> Takze bud by meli navigace prestat routovat track v CR nebo my vsude
> nahazeme access, ale rozhodne to neni default pro cely svet.
>
> Mirek
>
> --
> ,,,
>(o o)
>   =oOO==(_)==OOo===
>  )  mailto:miros...@suchy.cz  tel:+420-603-775737
> (   One picture is worth 128K words.
>  )Oooo.
>  .oooO   (   )
>  (   )) /
>   \ ((_/
>\_)
>
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-au] PSMA Administrative Boundaries

[Andrew Harvey]

Good to see there is a lot of interest in this. Local knowledge is going to
be key to ensuring success if we undertake work to bring this into OSM.

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 16:45, Ewen Hill  wrote:

> I would like to aski if it is possible to
> 1. add the ability to have, possibly at [*5*], the Aboriginal nations
> e.g.
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_Victoria_Aboriginal_tribes_(colourmap).jpg
> and
>


> 2. swap  *6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council) *and *7 District or
> Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater
> Melbourne, etc.) *as normally these areas are large than a singular LGA.
>

Despite what is on the OSM wiki, admin_level=7 is only really being used in
ACT at the moment, Greater Sydney isn't really an admin boundary. I can
only comment for NSW, but we have regions like Hunter, Central Coast,
Illawarra, South Coast, New England, Eastern Suburbs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_New_South_Wales but I've been
tagging these using place=district.

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 17:21, Andrew Davidson  wrote:

> On 31/8/18 16:23, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> > (not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data
> for 9
> > and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a separate discussion but
> > perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)
>
> Level 9 appears to have been intended for non-ABS derived suburbs and
> level 10 for ABS. What's happened is 10 has been used for suburbs.
>

Given ABS has pretty much nothing to do with how suburbs/localities are
defined, not sure that makes sense going forward.


> Do we have any data for bounded localities smaller than suburbs? I don't
> know of any jurisdiction that defines sub-suburb areas, so I don't see
> the point of moving away from 10.
>

Maybe as informal places which we can use place
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aplace tags for, but I'm not aware
of any which justify using boundary=administrative.


> I know that some people don't like having the admin boundaries in OSM. I
> find that having the suburb/locality boundaries is useful (downloading
> data by area and geo-referencing in Nominatim).


I feel this too, it's not data that we are really creating or adding value
but I can see having it in OSM can make it easier to use other OSM data as
well as helping to contributing to a global dataset with consistent schema.


> The LGA boundaries less
> so as most people don't really think very much about their local council
> and it's odd to see it appear in an address for example. But that said
> if you do the suburbs you might as well do the LGAs.
>

I hear you, but they are surveyable (usually street signs are branded with
the LGA and signs telling you when you enter the more rural shires) and it
is handy to be able to use OSM to easily check the LGA boundaries and have
all the attached metadata (website, phone number etc).

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 17:53, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> My 'problems' with the admin boundaries are;
>  where they use another way that is also a road/river. And then some
> mapper comes along and improves the road/river .. but buggers up the admin
> boundary.
> then I come along and 'fix it' using the LPI Base map .. and put that
> source on the way.
>

I've seen this problem too, especially for new mappers who want to change a
road, add turn restrictions etc. it's too easy to break relations like the
admin boundary. I think this is just the cost of having this data in OSM
that occasionally it will break and need fixing. Hopefully editors will
improve to reduce the risk but might be something we have to accept.


>
> 2 things on my wish list ;
> that admin boundaries don't use other 'close enough' ways already in OSM.
> This would reduce the number of times that the relationships are broken.
>
that admin boundaries have a source tag on there ways to say what the
> source is. This means when I come along and fix a broken one my source
> statement will not be confusing when looking at  the relationship as that
> relationship will have no source tag.
>

No problem with that.

Generally I wouldn't treat these boundaries as coordinates carved in stone
that absolutely must be fixed in OSM. I think it's fine if there they are
out my a few meters if it makes sense to line them up with a road or river,
especially if those boundaries are defined by the road or river.

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 22:17, cleary  wrote:

> - I agree that it is inappropriate to map administrative boundaries on the
> same way as natural phenomena such as rivers. The boundaries are usually
> where the river flowed sometime in the past when an early survey was done.
> The boundaries do not change but the rivers often do. I think it best
> always to map administrative boundaries separate from natural features.
>

I'm on the fence about this, I think it depends how they are defined, if
the suburb boundary is defined to follow a road, then the admin boundary
should use that 

Re: [Talk-it] Utente veneziano che basa il lavoro su streetview

[Sergio Manzi]

P.S. e N.B.: mi sono volontariamente limitato a parlare del dato "toponimo", 
perché si tratta di un dato particolarmente stabile: come contro-esempio, non 
accetterei informazioni sul nome di un ristorante o di una pompa di benzina 
(/visto che se ne parla in questi giorni.../), basandomi su quanto posso vedere 
in StreetView.


On 2018-08-31 14:58, Sergio Manzi wrote:
>
> Senza entrare nel merito della qualità del changeset, credo dipenda molto da 
> quale tipo di informazione è stata desunta da StreetView: se l'unica 
> informazione che ho desunto è il nome della via (calle, fondamenta, ecc..), 
> puntando lo "sguardo" verso il "nisioetto" (/per i non veneziani, si tratta 
> del riquadro di intonaco bianco sul quale vengono indicati i toponimi: 
> nisiol=lenzuolo, nisioetto=piccolo lenzuolo/), mi sembra che l'operazione sia 
> lecita, soprattutto se sto semplicemente controllando che la memoria o un 
> appunto preso male non mi ingannino.
>
> Non sto "copiando" o "ricalcando" dati di Google, ma sto usando uno strumento 
> che Google ha messo a disposizione di tutti (/per un suo chiaro 
> interesse.../) per tele-trasportarmi sul luogo e poter dare una occhiata 
> virtuale (/siamo nel 2018.../). Subentra poi il "mio" know-how, la mia 
> intelligenza, la mia vista, ecc., ad interpretare quel che vedo e desumerne 
> informazione. Diverso sarebbe il copia-incolla del nome della via da Google 
> Maps.
>
> Quanto sopra è una mia personalissima opinione e mi rendo conto che è in 
> contrasto con quanto indicato nel wiki [1], dove si cita esplicitamente anche 
> Google StreetView
>
> Ciao,
>
> Sergio
>
> [1] 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#2a._Can_I_trace_data_from_Google_Maps.2FNokia_Maps.2F3F
>
>
> On 2018-08-31 13:58, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> Nel contesto di una discussione su un changeset, ho incontrato un utente che 
>> dice di basare il lavoro su Google StreetView.
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/50453873
>>
>> Come si procede? Non credo tutto il suo lavoro sia stato basato su 
>> streetview, per esempio il changeset che non mi piaceva era un edit 
>> automatico che trasformava alcuni footway a Venezia in pedestrian.
>>
>> Ciao,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-it mailing list
>> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] reportáž ČT o navigacích

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 31.8.2018 v 14:34 Jan Sten Adámek napsal(a):
> U nás by měla být navigovatelná i autem (např. různé příjezdy k chatám),
> takže pokud tam auta explicitně nesmí, chyba je spíš v chybějícím access
> než v navigaci.

To je otázka. Příjezd k chate by mel byt znacen highway=service s
prislusnym surface= (gravel nebo ground).

U nas by meli byt highway=track neroutovatelne, protoze na lesni a polni
cesty je vjezd ze zakona/vyhlasky zakazan. Ovsem rozlisit to lze dost
tezko - viz nedavne diskuze zde (polni cesta v obci nemuze existovat,
nebo asfaltove lesni cesty v lese).

Ovsem v takove africe je highway=track uplne luxusni cesta pro 4WD a
mela by byt routovatelna. A pred pul rokem ji Maps.me urcite neroutovalo
(pro mne, bohuzel).

Takze bud by meli navigace prestat routovat track v CR nebo my vsude
nahazeme access, ale rozhodne to neni default pro cely svet.

Mirek

-- 
,,,
   (o o)
  =oOO==(_)==OOo===
 )  mailto:miros...@suchy.cz  tel:+420-603-775737
(   One picture is worth 128K words.
 )Oooo.
 .oooO   (   )
 (   )) /
  \ ((_/
   \_)


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-it] Utente veneziano che basa il lavoro su streetview

[Sergio Manzi]

Senza entrare nel merito della qualità del changeset, credo dipenda molto da 
quale tipo di informazione è stata desunta da StreetView: se l'unica 
informazione che ho desunto è il nome della via (calle, fondamenta, ecc..), 
puntando lo "sguardo" verso il "nisioetto" (/per i non veneziani, si tratta del 
riquadro di intonaco bianco sul quale vengono indicati i toponimi: 
nisiol=lenzuolo, nisioetto=piccolo lenzuolo/), mi sembra che l'operazione sia 
lecita, soprattutto se sto semplicemente controllando che la memoria o un 
appunto preso male non mi ingannino.

Non sto "copiando" o "ricalcando" dati di Google, ma sto usando uno strumento 
che Google ha messo a disposizione di tutti (/per un suo chiaro interesse.../) 
per tele-trasportarmi sul luogo e poter dare una occhiata virtuale (/siamo nel 
2018.../). Subentra poi il "mio" know-how, la mia intelligenza, la mia vista, 
ecc., ad interpretare quel che vedo e desumerne informazione. Diverso sarebbe 
il copia-incolla del nome della via da Google Maps.

Quanto sopra è una mia personalissima opinione e mi rendo conto che è in 
contrasto con quanto indicato nel wiki [1], dove si cita esplicitamente anche 
Google StreetView

Ciao,

Sergio

[1] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#2a._Can_I_trace_data_from_Google_Maps.2FNokia_Maps.2F3F


On 2018-08-31 13:58, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Nel contesto di una discussione su un changeset, ho incontrato un utente che 
> dice di basare il lavoro su Google StreetView.
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/50453873
>
> Come si procede? Non credo tutto il suo lavoro sia stato basato su 
> streetview, per esempio il changeset che non mi piaceva era un edit 
> automatico che trasformava alcuni footway a Venezia in pedestrian.
>
> Ciao,
> Martin
>
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-pt] Talk-pt Digest, Vol 103, Issue 7

[Filohipo]

Imagens de fundo
Para dar mais uma achega 
Os vértices geodésico s editados pelo H Valentim também podem ser usados
como referência. Há q ter atenção neste caso as zonas montanhosas
Cumprimentos


A sexta, 31/08/2018, 13:14, Nuno Caldeira 
escreveu:

> Para completar a informação já prestada pelo Marcos. Visite a seguinte
> página para mais detalhes
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Uso_de_Imagens
>
>
> A sexta, 31/08/2018, 13:00,  escreveu:
>
>> Send Talk-pt mailing list submissions to
>> talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> talk-pt-requ...@openstreetmap.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> talk-pt-ow...@openstreetmap.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Talk-pt digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>1. Discrepância entre imagens de fundo (Manuel Menezes de Sequeira)
>>2. Re: Discrepância entre imagens de fundo (Marcos Oliveira)
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 09:53:48 +
>> From: Manuel Menezes de Sequeira 
>> To: talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: [Talk-pt] Discrepância entre imagens de fundo
>> Message-ID:
>> > gk...@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Olá!
>>
>> Notei que por vezes há discrepâncias nas imagens de fundo. Por exemplo, na
>> zona do Mosteiro (Lajes das Flores, Açores) há alguma diferença entre as
>> Imagens Aréas Bing e o DigitalGlobe Standard. Nesses casos, em qual nos
>> devemos basear, durante as edições? Receio que tenha feito alterações
>> erradas por estar a seguir uma imagem de fundo errada.
>>
>> Cumprimentos,
>>
>> Manuel
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-pt/attachments/20180831/134ded74/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>>
>> --
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 11:19:44 +0100
>> From: Marcos Oliveira 
>> To: OSM Portugal 
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-pt] Discrepância entre imagens de fundo
>> Message-ID:
>> > 7eidlyn0epztw3o+owlokyhp3o9r67shr...@mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>
>> Olá Manuel,
>>
>> Baseias-te nos rastos de GPS que foram enviados para o OSM.
>>
>> Se estás a usar iD então pressiona a tecla B e a meio do menu lateral
>> tens essa opção. Procura nas redondezas por uma estrada movimentada
>> que tem sempre alguns traços.
>>
>> Para facilitar a tua vida o iD permite o alinhamento de imagens: no
>> final do mesmo menu há uma opção que te permite, através de setas,
>> corrigir a imagem de modo a que bata nos rastos de GPS.
>>
>> Se tens dificuldade em ver os rastos então basta pressionar a tecla F
>> e a meio mete "Sem Preenchimento".
>>
>> 2018-08-31 10:53 GMT+01:00, Manuel Menezes de Sequeira <
>> mmseque...@gmail.com>:
>> > Olá!
>> >
>> > Notei que por vezes há discrepâncias nas imagens de fundo. Por exemplo,
>> na
>> > zona do Mosteiro (Lajes das Flores, Açores) há alguma diferença entre as
>> > Imagens Aréas Bing e o DigitalGlobe Standard. Nesses casos, em qual nos
>> > devemos basear, durante as edições? Receio que tenha feito alterações
>> > erradas por estar a seguir uma imagem de fundo errada.
>> >
>> > Cumprimentos,
>> >
>> > Manuel
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Um Abraço,
>> Marcos Oliveira
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-pt mailing list
>> Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> End of Talk-pt Digest, Vol 103, Issue 7
>> ***
>>
> ___
> Talk-pt mailing list
> Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt
>
___
Talk-pt mailing list
Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt

[OSM-talk-be] Fwd: Next meetings FOSS4G

[Johan Van de Wauw]

Hi all,

Also people from OSM are kindly invited for these meetings. Please let me
know if you can attend any of the meetings, so I can fix a date.

Kind Regards,
Johan

-- Forwarded message -
From: Johan Van de Wauw 
Date: Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:04 PM
Subject: Next meetings FOSS4G
To: “belg...@lists.osgeo.org” 


Hi all,

We have two upcoming meetings for FOSS4G.be . Please help pick a date.

An online meeting in the first week of september:
https://framadate.org/qk8aEBnOGCPcJjIY

A face-to-face meeting in the second/third week of september. The major
topic will be assembling the program.

https://framadate.org/WTnLiNDV9joNKs2N

Please note that anyone interested is kindly invited to join.

Kind Regards,
Johan
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-ja] 行政区画外の地域名について

[tomoya muramoto]

一般的なルールはないと思いますので、私の個人方針を述べます。
(およそのところはいいだ様と同意見かと思います)

(1)自然物であれば、natural=*をつける。場合によってはplace=localityつけることもある。
(2)自然物でないエリアの名前であれば、place=localityをつける
(2-1)旧大字や「～集落」「～地区」は、place=localityは不適であると思う。place=hamletを導入するのが良いのではないかと考えている。
(2-2)「温泉街」のように、明らかに観光向けであればtourism=attractionをつける。place=*は不要と考える。

以下コメントです。

>行政区分以外の地名については一般的にはOSMの本来のタグどおりに人口区分に
>従ってタグ付けするという感じでしょうか？

行政区分以外の地名については、place=province/county/city/town/village/suburb/quarter/neighbourhoodはつけません。

>・地域自治会や地域住民などで主に使われている、区分がはっきりしないがバス
>停名や交差点名などにも用いられている地域名など
>-> こっちはたぶん neighbourhoodのほうが適切
place=neighbourhoodは「小字 / 字 / 丁 /
丁目」と定義されているので、この目的には不適であると考えます。ケースバイケースかと思いますが、place=hamletのほうがよいと思います。

muramoto
___
Talk-ja mailing list
Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja

Re: [Talk-cz] reportáž ČT o navigacích

[Jan Sten Adámek]

highway=track nemá žádný default: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions


U nás by měla být navigovatelná i autem (např. různé příjezdy k chatám), 
takže pokud tam auta explicitně nesmí, chyba je spíš v chybějícím access 
než v navigaci.


Sten

En 31 de agosto de 2018 07:20:05 Milan Cerny  escribió:

Ahoj, včera mě zaujala reportáž na ČT o tom, že navigace navigují do zákazů 
vjezdu.


https://www.ceskatelevize.cz/ivysilani/10118379000-udalosti-v-regionech-praha/218411000140830-udalosti-v-regionech/obsah/640658-jizda-s-navigaci-v-krkonosich-muze-prinest-problemy

V Maps me jsem to pro zajímavost zkoušel, a opravdu, trasu Mísečky - Špindl 
vedou po lesní cestě.
Je chyba v navigaci (Maps-Me, GraphHopper), že autem routuje po 
highway=track, nebo v tom, že highway=track nemá omezen access?


Jinými slovy je chyba u nás, tedy v OSM datech, nebo u těch co data 
zpracovávají?


Milan

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz





___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-at] Quantität vor Qualität beim BEV-Adressimport?

[Rudolf Mayer]

Hallo!

Robert Kaiser wrote on 31/08/18 14:15:

vari...@mailbox.org schrieb:
Einen kompletten Revert halte ich für unsinnig, trotz aller Fehler und 
persönlicher, äh, unstimmigkeiten, bringen die ganzen Adressen, die er 
einträgt einen großen Mehrwert, imho.


Das Problem ist, dass ohne Revert er die Praxis einfach so weiter führt 



Ich glaube auch, dass hier ein revert angebracht wäre.

lg

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

[Talk-cz] reportáž ČT o navigacích

[Milan Cerny]

Ahoj, včera mě zaujala reportáž na ČT o tom, že navigace navigují do zákazů 
vjezdu.

https://www.ceskatelevize.cz/ivysilani/10118379000-udalosti-v-regionech-praha/218411000140830-udalosti-v-regionech/obsah/640658-jizda-s-navigaci-v-krkonosich-muze-prinest-problemy

V Maps me jsem to pro zajímavost zkoušel, a opravdu, trasu Mísečky - Špindl 
vedou po lesní cestě.
Je chyba v navigaci (Maps-Me, GraphHopper), že autem routuje po highway=track, 
nebo v tom, že highway=track nemá omezen access?

Jinými slovy je chyba u nás, tedy v OSM datech, nebo u těch co data 
zpracovávají?

Milan

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-au] PSMA Administrative Boundaries

[Lee Mason]

Yes, good work getting the waiver. I would also agree not to include electoral 
boundaries. And my primary interest would also be Tasmania.

The state (and probably more broadly) already has a comprehensive naming of 
localities and suburbs from surveys, but mostly from the GeoScience Australia 
place names dataset. I would think that when integrating PSMA boundaries, it 
would be important to preserve these place nodes which more accurately pinpoint 
the locations of smaller communities (even if it is only a cluster of a few 
homes), which would not necessarily be the centroid of the relation.

And just hand-waving some possible scenario/solution: nodes of place=hamlet or 
lower would be integrated with the PSMA locality region. The node would be take 
role:label in the relation. The relation would place=hamlet as well as 
boundary=admin?



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] PSMA Administrative Boundaries

[cleary]

Permission to include the PSMA Boundaries in OSM is great news.

In regard to questions and comments from other mappers:
-  I find the current boundaries in NSW and SA to be useful i.e. include
   LGA and suburb/locality. However, electoral boundaries including
   local government wards seem very specialised and are probably better
   mapped elsewhere.-  I find LGA boundaries useful. Where a road suddenly 
changes name,
   changes surface, reversals of housenumbers occur etc., these
   phenomena often become understandable when you see where LGA
   boundaries lie.- I agree that it is inappropriate to map administrative 
boundaries on
  the same way as natural phenomena such as rivers. The boundaries are
  usually where the river flowed sometime in the past when an early
  survey was done. The boundaries do not change but the rivers often do.
  I think it best always to map administrative boundaries separate from
  natural features.- It would be possible to change suburbs from level 10 to 
level 9 if
  others find that useful but I think that sub-suburb localities such as
  neighbourhoods are not "administrative" nor (to my knowledge) are they
  defined by a government authority so I am unsure what level 10 could
  be used for, if suburbs are made level 9.
I am interested in administrative boundaries and willing to help where I
can - however I am just an enthusiast not a mapping professional - I
would not be confident to attempt any large scale import, if that is
envisaged. However, if individuals are each taking an area and gradually
adding new boundaries or checking existing boundaries against PSMA data,
I would be interested in contributing, once the process is agreed.
Thanks again to Andrew Harvey - this is a great enhancement to
data in OSM.



On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, at 4:23 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages
> data.gov.au have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the
> PSMA Administrative Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].> 
> Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great
> encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB
> [Administrative Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM
> for your ongoing global open data efforts."> 
> Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be
> able to comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the
> current OSM data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to
> extract administrative boundaries[4]:> 
> osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf
> nwr/boundary=administrative -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf> 
> Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA
> boundaries:> 
> ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-
> boundaries.osm.pbf> 
> The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:
> 
> 3 n/a
> 4 State or Territory
> 5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
> 6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
> 7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater
> Sydney, Greater Melbourne, etc.)> 8 Postcode
> 9 Suburb and Locality
> 10 Suburb and Locality
> 
> (not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no
> data for 9 and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate
> discussion but perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods
> be in 10?)> 
> PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7]
> built from [8])> 
> Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be
> included in OSM)> State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be 
> included in OSM)
> State Boundaries
> Local Government Areas
> Suburbs / Localities
> Town Points
> Wards
> 
> admin_level 6 LGAs
> It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few
> minor differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-
> existent (ACT doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the
> Territory). SA is missing a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.> 
> admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here
> 
> suburbs/localities
> NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a
> number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent
> investigation and correction.> 
> ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in
> suburb/localities there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and
> Parkes), but the districts have a slightly different name format.> 
> All other states are empty in OSM.
> 
> Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC
> (VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA
> (data.sa.gov.au) already.> 
> So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which
> licensing wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is
> should we and how should we do that. Is anyone interested in working
> on this? If people are, I think it should go through the proper import
> process (discuss first, identify the 

Re: [Talk-at] Quantität vor Qualität beim BEV-Adressimport?

[Robert Kaiser]

vari...@mailbox.org schrieb:

Einen kompletten Revert halte ich für unsinnig, trotz aller Fehler und 
persönlicher, äh, unstimmigkeiten, bringen die ganzen Adressen, die er einträgt 
einen großen Mehrwert, imho.


Das Problem ist, dass ohne Revert er die Praxis einfach so weiter führt 
und damit die Community ähnlich schädigt wie damals der plan-at-Import. 
Aber wenn du der Meinung bist, dass wir keine engagierte lokale 
Community brauchen, stimme ich dir zu.


KaiRo


___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-pt] Talk-pt Digest, Vol 103, Issue 7

[Nuno Caldeira]

Para completar a informação já prestada pelo Marcos. Visite a seguinte
página para mais detalhes
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Uso_de_Imagens


A sexta, 31/08/2018, 13:00,  escreveu:

> Send Talk-pt mailing list submissions to
> talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> talk-pt-requ...@openstreetmap.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> talk-pt-ow...@openstreetmap.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Talk-pt digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>1. Discrepância entre imagens de fundo (Manuel Menezes de Sequeira)
>2. Re: Discrepância entre imagens de fundo (Marcos Oliveira)
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 09:53:48 +
> From: Manuel Menezes de Sequeira 
> To: talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-pt] Discrepância entre imagens de fundo
> Message-ID:
>  gk...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Olá!
>
> Notei que por vezes há discrepâncias nas imagens de fundo. Por exemplo, na
> zona do Mosteiro (Lajes das Flores, Açores) há alguma diferença entre as
> Imagens Aréas Bing e o DigitalGlobe Standard. Nesses casos, em qual nos
> devemos basear, durante as edições? Receio que tenha feito alterações
> erradas por estar a seguir uma imagem de fundo errada.
>
> Cumprimentos,
>
> Manuel
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-pt/attachments/20180831/134ded74/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> --
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 11:19:44 +0100
> From: Marcos Oliveira 
> To: OSM Portugal 
> Subject: Re: [Talk-pt] Discrepância entre imagens de fundo
> Message-ID:
>  7eidlyn0epztw3o+owlokyhp3o9r67shr...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Olá Manuel,
>
> Baseias-te nos rastos de GPS que foram enviados para o OSM.
>
> Se estás a usar iD então pressiona a tecla B e a meio do menu lateral
> tens essa opção. Procura nas redondezas por uma estrada movimentada
> que tem sempre alguns traços.
>
> Para facilitar a tua vida o iD permite o alinhamento de imagens: no
> final do mesmo menu há uma opção que te permite, através de setas,
> corrigir a imagem de modo a que bata nos rastos de GPS.
>
> Se tens dificuldade em ver os rastos então basta pressionar a tecla F
> e a meio mete "Sem Preenchimento".
>
> 2018-08-31 10:53 GMT+01:00, Manuel Menezes de Sequeira <
> mmseque...@gmail.com>:
> > Olá!
> >
> > Notei que por vezes há discrepâncias nas imagens de fundo. Por exemplo,
> na
> > zona do Mosteiro (Lajes das Flores, Açores) há alguma diferença entre as
> > Imagens Aréas Bing e o DigitalGlobe Standard. Nesses casos, em qual nos
> > devemos basear, durante as edições? Receio que tenha feito alterações
> > erradas por estar a seguir uma imagem de fundo errada.
> >
> > Cumprimentos,
> >
> > Manuel
> >
>
>
> --
> Um Abraço,
> Marcos Oliveira
>
>
>
> --
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> ___
> Talk-pt mailing list
> Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt
>
>
> --
>
> End of Talk-pt Digest, Vol 103, Issue 7
> ***
>
___
Talk-pt mailing list
Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt

Re: [Talk-cz] GPS-presnost

[r00t]

Zdravim diskuzi o GPS,

Je potreba rozlisovat rozdilne metody mereni:
1) Klasicke GPS kde se porovnava casovy rozdil prichodu signalu z druzic.
   Takhle funguji vsechny mobily, male USB gps a ostatni "konzumni" zarizeni. Je
   mozne pouzivat korekce z EGNOSu ale vlastni presnost je omezena modulacni
   rychlosti GPS signalu jako takoveho. Hlavni vyhoda ze ze je mozne kombinovat
   ruzne systemy (GPS,GLONASS,GALILEO) dohromady pro lepsi presnost. Tady jde o
   nejake 1-2m pokud je videt dost satelitu + EGNOS.
2) GPS-RTK kde se porovnava signal mezi prijimacem na nezname poloze a
   referencni stanici kde je poloha znama. Navic se pouziva mereni faze signalu
   coz umoznuje presnost na nekolik cm pri pouziti geodetickych prijimacu. Tahle
   metoda ale taky potrebuje mnohem vetsi uroven signalu pro fazove mereni a
   tedy mnohem vetsi antenu. Implementovat tohle do mobilu moc nedava smysl
   protoze ta antenka co tam je by stejne nefungovala. Taky ruzne vlivy okoli
   jsou znat (dotknout se anteny znamena totalni ztratu signalu...) a v hustem
   lese to taky moc dobre nefunguje. Taky nejde jednoduse pouzivat EGNOS korekce
   (protoze jsou jenom pro GPS ale ne pro ostatni systemy). Casto se pouziva
   post-processing, tedy ze v terenu se nahraji RAW mereni a zpetne kdyz uz jdou
   na internetu najit presne korekce hodin a drahy GPS druzic se dopocitaji uz
   presnejsi polohy.
3) GPS-PPP je starsi metoda nez se rozmohlo GPS-RTK, pouzivana pro geodeticke
   ucely. Funguje stejne jako klasicka gps, jenom se taky pouziva fazove mereni
   signalu a vysledky se prumeruji za dlouhou doby (desitky minut...hodin).
   Vetsina prijimacu je dvoufrekvencni (L1+L2) a dokazi tak modelovat a
   kompenzovat vliv ionosfery a troposfrery. Tak je mozne zamerit jeden fixni
   bod velice presne bez nutnosti referencni stanice. Dnes uz nema moc vyznam
   protoze je mozne pouzivat GPS-RTK pres internet a referencnich stanic je 
dost.

K puvodnimu tematu: Nez pouzivat pro mapovani GPS co je v mobilu nebo tabletu,
tak to uz je urcite lepsi si poridit nebo postavit lepsi GPS (neco jako
antena+Ublox M8N GPS modul+USB TTL nebo bluetooth modul do vodotesne krabicky,
s magnetem pro uchyceni na kolo nebo auto). Pokud se zapne 
GPS+GLONASS+GALILEO+WAAS
tak by to melo mit pouzitelnou presnost a bude to asi to nejlepsi co jde 
klasickou
GPS zmerit. Pri hodne spatnem signalu si ale stejne bude GPS vymyslet... reseni
je exportovat GPX kde je u kazdeho bodu presnost. Tak je videt kde jsou u trasy
horsi mista na ktere je potreba si dat pozor.

S GPS-RTK je mozne si taky hrat, ale po nekolika letech pokusu mi prijde ze
levne GPS moduly poradne nefunguji. A nebo mam nejake divne kopie z Ciny co
nemaji tak dobre parametry (to je dost problem, pri kupovani UBLOX M8N je
eBay plna padelku, bacha na to!). I s velkou antenou (20x20cm) stale signal neni
dost silny na stabilni mereni fazi a GPS-RTK vypocty se nesejdou jak by mely.

Profi geodeticke prijimace jsou urcite mnohem lepsi, ale i pouzite jsou poradne
drahe, staci si na eBay vyhledat GPS RTK a prohlednout si ceny... navic ruzne
stare GPS nedokazou prijimat ostatni systemy (GLONASS,GALILEO) a nekdy uz vubec
nefunguji ani na GPS kvuli pretoceni GPS tydne (dokazaly zpracovat jenom tyden
0-1023).


r00t


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-it] dataset MISE distributori

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-08-31 13:58 GMT+02:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> No, non ne ho ancora trovati ma non posso escludere che ci siano. Possono
> essere, ad esempio, impianti attivati di recente o impianti che hanno una
> errata localizzazione nei dati MISE.
>
>

visto che io avevo una quota di 50% mancanti nel db MISE su le mie
verifiche non le escludo nemmeno io ;-)



> Ho trovato però degli errori di tagging in OSM, come il seguente, che era
> mappato amenity=fuel e non aeroway=fuel:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2016210205
>


non ha proprio il massimo di dettaglio, che tipo di pompa è? C'è solo
kerosene?

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] Utente veneziano che basa il lavoro su streetview

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Nel contesto di una discussione su un changeset, ho incontrato un utente
che dice di basare il lavoro su Google StreetView.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/50453873

Come si procede? Non credo tutto il suo lavoro sia stato basato su
streetview, per esempio il changeset che non mi piaceva era un edit
automatico che trasformava alcuni footway a Venezia in pedestrian.

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] dataset MISE distributori

[Andrea Musuruane]

Ciao,

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 11:58 AM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
> 2018-08-31 10:40 GMT+02:00 Andrea Musuruane :
>
>> Purtroppo non ci sono abbastanza mapper per tenere aggiornate tutte le
>> amenity - specialmente quelle che cambiano più di frequente - e tra queste
>> le stazioni di rifornimento.
>>
>
> quindi vorresti sincronizzare OSM con il MISE e importare continuamente da
> loro / sovrascrivere cosa inseriscono gli utenti in OSM? Offrono dei diffs?
> Ogni quanto?
>

Sinceramente non ci avevo pensato. Però ora che me lo fai notare mi sembra
una buona idea fare degli import periodici (1 volta all'anno?) dei dati
MISE, sopratutto ora che abbiamo il tag "ref:mise". Si potrebbe anche
cercare di raffinare il processo tenendo presente la data di ultima
modifica in OSM.

hai trovato anche impianti che mancavano nel db MISE?


No, non ne ho ancora trovati ma non posso escludere che ci siano. Possono
essere, ad esempio, impianti attivati di recente o impianti che hanno una
errata localizzazione nei dati MISE.

Ho trovato però degli errori di tagging in OSM, come il seguente, che era
mappato amenity=fuel e non aeroway=fuel:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2016210205

Ciao,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] maperská minirecenze MI 8

[Jan Macura]

Ahoj,

On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 08:57, Pavel Machek  wrote:

> On Wed 2018-08-29 23:47:51, Jan Macura wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 at 09:30, majka  wrote:
> > > On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 23:37, Jan Macura  wrote:
> > >> Zrychlení fixu by měl být logický důsledek většího množství
> viditelných
> > >> satelitů.
> > >
> > > Ale tak nějak ne důsledek jediný...
> > >
> > Jestli věříš, že důsledkem bude i zpřesnění polohy, tak nečekej zázraky.
> > (...)
>
> Tady si nemyslim ze souhlasim.
>
> a) je to porad z tech samejch satelitu.
>
> b) L5 bezi na jiny frekvenci, takze by mel pomoct s ionosferickou
> chybou.
>

promiň, odbočili jsme moc od původního tématu – méně velkých odchylek v
poloze jsem měl na mysli skutečně jako důsledek jenom většího počtu
viditelných satelitů. Nebral jsem vůbec v úvahu počet a frekvence
přijímaných vln. Byla to reakce na Majky postesknutí, že novější přijímače,
které umí kromě GPS i GLONASS a Galileo nedosahují lepší přesnosti.
Jinak máš samozřejmě pravdu.

Ano, druhy prijimac a dGPS by mel pomoct "docela hodne". Dobra zprava
> je ze to nemusi byt nutne drahe, GPSka je dneska v kazdym telefonu. Ne
> v kazdym asi poskytuje dost zakladni informace pro dGPS, ale tam kde
> jo, jde jen o 2 telefony, propojeni mezi nima a specializovany
> software
>

Ha, tak tohle bych chtěl vidět :-)

H.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-cz] Zprovoznění obchvatu Němčice

[majka]

"Zprovoznila" jsem v OSM obchvat Němčic
,
který pustili dnes ráno.

Část tam byla jako "construction", křižovatky na začátku a konci jsem zatím
udělala podle katastrální mapy a pozemků (lpis).
"Staré" je vyndané z relace té dvojky, nové je tam přidané.

Pokud by to někdo chtěl po mě zkontrolovat, má možnost. Uvidím jaké bude
počasí přes víkend - jestli bude co k čemu, tak si udělám výlet na kole a
projdu to na místě. Kdybych se tam nedostala, budu tam mít cestu koncem
září.

Majka
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] GPS-presnost

[Michal Poupa]

Cerifikované letecké GPS používají WAAS resp. EGNOS a dokaží měrit s frekvencí 
10 Hz tedy 10 měrení za sekundu. WAAS a EGNOS přenáší i stav systému GPS. 
Jediná nevýhoda je vidět na jih - tedy na geostaconalrní družici.

Ty lepší přijímače v telefonech měří pouze 1 Hz tedy jedno měření za sekundu. 
To mluvíme o lepšich tel. IPhone a dražsí Adnroidy ...



31. 8. 2018 v 11:32, Pavel Moravec :

> WAAS - konkrétně EGNOS

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-de] Neues Förderangebot von WMDE für Projekte um OSM

[Christoph Hormann]

On Friday 31 August 2018, Stefan Kaufmann wrote:
> > Wikimedia mit der Kritik umgeht ist deren Sache, für mich wäre
> > jetzt garnicht so entscheidend, da die Ausschreibung zu
> > modifizieren (obwohl das sicher nicht verkehrt wäre), sondern dass
> > das in die Diskussion eingeht und man sich der Problematik bewusst
> > wird.
>
> Faendet ihr nicht spannender, konkrete Themenfelder zu
> identifizieren, die von WMDE dann auch durch Foerderung unterstuetzt
> werden koennen?

Da ich mit den Wikimedia-Vereinszielen, möglichen Zweckbindungen der 
verwendeten Spenden und den Zielen des Förderprogramms nicht vertraut 
bin, kann ich dazu nicht wirklich viel sagen.  Ein 'ich wünsch mir 
einfach mal was' ist da kaum zielführend.

Wenn Wikimedia konkrete Beratung braucht, wie man im OSM-Bereich 
bestimmte Dinge am Besten unterstützt (z.B. wir würden gerne Mapping 
von X oder Karten, die Y darstellen, fördern) wäre das sicher gut 
machbar, da könnte wie Frederik schon angedeutet hat auch der FOSSGIS 
kompetente Hilfe bieten.

Ein Bereich, wo sich der FOSSGIS traditionell mit Förderung recht schwer 
tut ist, wenn es darum geht, Arbeitszeit von Leuten zu bezahlen.  Das 
kollidiert bei uns recht stark mit der Kultur der freiwilligen 
ehrenamtlichen Arbeit im Verein.  Wenn Wikimedia hier Möglichkeiten hat 
wäre das möglicherweise eine gute Ergänzung.  Aber das hier verlinkte 
Förder-Angebot klammert diesen Bereich ja auch erkennbar aus.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Neues Förderangebot von WMDE für Projekte um OSM

[Stefan Kaufmann]

Am 2018-08-30 um 22:31 schrieb Christoph Hormann:

> Wie 
> Wikimedia mit der Kritik umgeht ist deren Sache, für mich wäre jetzt 
> garnicht so entscheidend, da die Ausschreibung zu modifizieren (obwohl 
> das sicher nicht verkehrt wäre), sondern dass das in die Diskussion 
> eingeht und man sich der Problematik bewusst wird.

Faendet ihr nicht spannender, konkrete Themenfelder zu identifizieren,
die von WMDE dann auch durch Foerderung unterstuetzt werden koennen?

regards,
-stk

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-it] Import civici Milano - regole di traduzione

[Andrea Musuruane]

Ciao,
oggi vediamo come tradurre i dati dei civici dal formato originario a
quello OSM.

Caricate i dati in QGIS per mezzo della funzione "Layer -> Aggiungi layer
-> Aggiungi layer testo delimitato". Come "Campo X" e "Campo Y" scegliete
rispettivamente WGS84_X e WGS84_Y. Come proiezione "WGS 84 / UTM zone 32N
(EPGS:32632)".

Salvate quindi il layer così ottenuto in uno shapefile (io ho usato per
comodità lo stesso nome del file CSV ovvero Civici_20180718) avendo cura di
usare la stessa proiezione.

Per convertire i dati dal formato shapefile al formato OSM, usiamo ogr2osm
con la seguente regola di traduzione.
https://github.com/musuruan/osm_imports/blob/master/milano/civici.py

La traduzione funziona secondo le seguenti regole:

   - *loc_ref* contiene *IDMASTER*. Questo è l'ID ufficiale del civico e
   sarà usato per fare la conflation in import futuri. Il tag loc_ref è già
   usato a Milano sulle highway per indicare il codice arco AMAT.
   - *addr:housenumber* contiente *NUMEROCOMPLETO* convertito in minuscolo
   (per l'esponente).
   - *addr:street* contiene il toponimo OSM della strada identificata da
   *CODICE_VIA* nello stradario generato precedentemente. Se *CODICE_VIA*
   non ha una corrispondenza, viene aggiungo un tag *fixme*.
   - *addr:city* contiene *Milano*. I confini amministrativi ISTAT sono
   spesso imprecisi ed è meglio sempre specificare la città per evitare casi
   dubbi.

Inoltre, vengono scartati anche tutti i civici soppressi.

Per avere una migliore qualità dei dati e per ridurre il processo di QA
successivo all'import, bisogna correggere i problemi identificati nei dati
OSM descritti nella mail "Import civici Milano - primi passi"
.

Il file OSM risultante è disponibile qui:
https://github.com/musuruan/osm_imports/blob/master/milano/Civici_20180718.osm

Con questo si può iniziare iniziare ad analizzare la qualità dei dati con
JOSM, mettendo come sfondo una mappa (OSM Carto o altro). *Mi raccomando di
NON fare l'upload di questi dati.*

Ricordo che c'è necessità di mapper milanesi (sia residenti che pendolari)
per poter fare questo import. Iniziate a segnarvi sulla wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import
/Catalogue/Address_import_for_Milan#Team_Approach

La prossima volta vedremo come fare la conflation.

Ciao,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-us] NYC Name Vandalism

[Rihards]

On 2018.08.30. 23:20, Kevin Kenny wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 10:39 AM Ian Dees  wrote:
>>
>> Yes, the original harmful edit was made by user "MedwedianPresident" in 
>> changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61555047 20 days ago. It 
>> was then reverted by naoliv a day later: 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61556585.
>>
>> naoliv also blocked the user: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2141
> 
> Many thanks to the hopelessly overloaded DWG for handling this.
> 
> A problem here is that it gives us a tremendous black eye in the
> press.  I wonder how, moving forward, we can lessen the chances of
> this sort of hate speech propagating off the project. Other projects
> have found that having a mandatory review and moderation process for
> new users is helpful, because the sort of person who leaves this sort
> of mess is usually creating a one-time account to do it, rather than
> having made earlier sound contributions.

It gives us the same press as some vandals messing with wikipedia -
let's not see it as a worse thing than it is.

As a sidenote, this was detected and revert in OSM in a day. If data
consumers would update the data more frequently, the impact would be
much, much smaller (in this specific case, probably nobody would have
noticed).

> If my experience with other open-source and crowdsourced projects is
> any guide, it only takes a incident or two like this for The Powers
> That Be in many organizations to start forbidding the use of
> open-source material "because there's no quality control and too much
> legal risk."-- 
 Rihards

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-it] dataset MISE distributori

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-08-31 10:40 GMT+02:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> Tra l'altro, con una query overpass, potete trovare i distributori che non
> sono nel database del MISE (non hanno il tag ref:mise). In OSM ho trovato
> impianti chiusi e smantellati da anni.
>


hai trovato anche impianti che mancavano nel db MISE? Io ho controllato 2 e
di 1 non sono sicuro, dell'altro invece sono sicuro che esiste nella
realtà: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4772246944

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] dataset MISE distributori

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2018-08-31 10:40 GMT+02:00 Andrea Musuruane :

> Ciao,
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 10:24 PM Volker Schmidt  wrote:
>
>> Ho paura che tutto questo import, con tutta la buona volontà degli
>> autori, non è andato bene. E se sono cosi tanti gli errori, chi mi dice che
>> i dati che ci interessano veramente, cioè il numero identificativo è di una
>> qualità più alta?
>>
>
> Per quanto ho avuto modo di verificare nelle mie zone, indubbiamente sì.
>
> Purtroppo non ci sono abbastanza mapper per tenere aggiornate tutte le
> amenity - specialmente quelle che cambiano più di frequente - e tra queste
> le stazioni di rifornimento.
>


quindi vorresti sincronizzare OSM con il MISE e importare continuamente da
loro / sovrascrivere cosa inseriscono gli utenti in OSM? Offrono dei diffs?
Ogni quanto?





>
> Tra l'altro, con una query overpass, potete trovare i distributori che non
> sono nel database del MISE (non hanno il tag ref:mise). In OSM ho trovato
> impianti chiusi e smantellati da anni.
> Se volete controllare le vostre zone, la query è la seguente (dovete
> cambiare ovviamente area di ricerca):
> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/BwB
>
>
>


grazie, è utile.


Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-pt] Discrepância entre imagens de fundo

[Manuel Menezes de Sequeira]

Olá!

Notei que por vezes há discrepâncias nas imagens de fundo. Por exemplo, na
zona do Mosteiro (Lajes das Flores, Açores) há alguma diferença entre as
Imagens Aréas Bing e o DigitalGlobe Standard. Nesses casos, em qual nos
devemos basear, durante as edições? Receio que tenha feito alterações
erradas por estar a seguir uma imagem de fundo errada.

Cumprimentos,

Manuel
___
Talk-pt mailing list
Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt

Re: [Talk-GB] un-named roads in UK

[Simon Poole]

Am 30.08.2018 um 23:26 schrieb Mark Goodge:
> ..
>
> This is actually a problem for OSM, as the address tags don't allow
> for a house number to be attached to anything other than a street
> name. But, in rural areas, it can often be a hamlet name.
>
> ...
Pointing out the obvious, that is what addr:place is for. So it isn't
actually an issue.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-de] Wege des WSV an den Kanälen / tagging

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am 31. August 2018 um 11:17 schrieb Heiko Jacobs :

> Am 26.08.2018 um 22:49 schrieb Florian Lohoff:
>
>> Wasserwirtschaft hat aber nichts mit Wasserstraßen zu tun. Habe ich ja
>> ausführlich dargelegt. Wassewirtschaft ist Wassergewinnung.
>>
>
> Das ist AUCH Wasserwirtschaft, Wasserbau an Gewässern gehört
> aber auch zur Wasserwirtschaft.



ja, weil Wasserwirtschaft ein extrem allgemeiner Begriff ist, der alles was
mit Wasser zu tun hat umfasst.
Der Duden sagt z.B.: Wasserwirtschaft "Gesamtheit der Maßnahmen zur
Wasserversorgung, zur Entsorgung von Abwasser und zur Regulierung des
Wasserhaushalts"
und Wasserbau: "Bau von Anlagen für die *Wasserwirtschaft*; Hydrotechnik"
"Wasserwirtschaftsamt": "(in bestimmten Bundesländern) für die
Wasserwirtschaft, besonders für Wasserbau und Wasserschutz, [gemeinsam mit
anderen Behörden] zuständiges Amt"

Gruß,
Martin
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Wege des WSV an den Kanälen / tagging

[Heiko Jacobs]

Am 27.08.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Florian Lohoff:

 Alle anderen definitionen sind ohne
Konsenzbildung/Abstimmung irgendwann mal in die Deutsche Fassung des
Wiki Artikels geschmuggelt worden.


Aus der ALLERERSTEN Version der engl. highway=track-Seite 26. Mai 2008:

> Description
> unpaved/unsealed roads for agricultural use; gravel roads in the forest etc.

ETC.!!!

Ist SO mit dem "etc." in die engl. highway-Seite als Erstbeschreibung
am 16.8.07 eingebaut worden:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key%3Ahighway=revision=44789=44694

Ergo: Im Wiki war track offenbar noch nie exklusiv auf Feld und Wand
festgelegt.



___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-cz] GPS-presnost

[Pavel Moravec]

Ahoj,
zrovna obdoba WAAS - konkrétně EGNOS - na úrovni EU funguje, ale jak 
jsem psal už dříve, příliš se v současných zařízeních nepoužívá (třeba 
externí moduly od uBloxu ji ale umí použít). Uměly ho použít už staré 
GPS se SIRF III chipsetem.


Co se DGPS dat týká, dají se získat kromě přijmu VHF signálu i pomocí 
NTRIP protokolu prostřednictvím Internetu (třeba z Geodetické 
Observatoře Pecný), ale opět, není moc jak je dostat do GPS v telefonu, 
ani v současných Androidech (7.0+) s podporovaným HW, aplikace jsou 
většinou placené.


Spíše je zvláštní, že nedochází až tak k výraznému zlepšení při použití 
více GNSS, když různé frekvence u GPS, GLONASS a BeiDou/Galilleo by s 
ionosférickými korekcemi měly pomoc obdobně jako při využití L5 pásma, 
ale buď to ta zařízení ve výpočtu nezohledňují, nebo je rozdíl ve 
frekvencích příliš malý na nějaké smysluplné výpočty, popř. je příliš 
nízká kódová (čipová) rychlost pro takové zpřesnění.


Zdravím
Pavel Moravec

Dne 31.8.2018 v 11:13 <0174 napsal(a):
Díky za upřesnění, nevěděl jsem, že ty stanice máme i v ČR. Něco 
podobného jako DGPS Garmin uměl/umí, akorát jen v Severní Americe:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Area_Augmentation_System

Nicméně pro naše potřeby si myslím, že to průměrování dává slušné 
výsledky, zejména v porovnání z nezprůměrovanými body v těžkém terénu.


Vojta

Dne 31. srpna 2018 10:46 Jan Macura > napsal(a):


Ahoj,

On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 09:55, mailto:jo...@razdva.cz>> wrote:

Presnost geodetickych GPS neni v prumerovani (i kdyz ano, udela
se treba deset mereni za deset sekund a vysledek se ulozi), ale
v pouziti korekci, viz


https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diferenci%C3%A1ln%C3%AD_GPS#Princip_a_vlastnosti




To je za (a). Za (b) ještě v použití fázových měření namísto
kódových dat.

H.

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz 




___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz



___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-de] Wege des WSV an den Kanälen / tagging

[Heiko Jacobs]

Am 27.08.2018 um 15:34 schrieb Florian Lohoff:

und so wenn das dann freigegeben ist:

http://www.wsa-regensburg.wsv.de/images/Deg_klein_00018.JPG


"Frei für Fußgänger und Radfahrer auf eigene Gefahr"
und Motorfahrzeuge verboten.

Landeswaldgesetz BW:
§ 37 Betreten des Waldes
(1) Jeder darf Wald zum Zwecke der Erholung betreten. Das Betreten
des Waldes erfolgt auf eigene Gefahr. ...

Etc. Radfahren erlaubt, Motorfzg. nicht.
Also sehr ähnliche Regeln auf den Betriebsgeländen der Forstwirtschaft.





___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Wege des WSV an den Kanälen / tagging

[Heiko Jacobs]

Am 26.08.2018 um 22:49 schrieb Florian Lohoff:

Wasserwirtschaft hat aber nichts mit Wasserstraßen zu tun. Habe ich ja
ausführlich dargelegt. Wassewirtschaft ist Wassergewinnung.


Das ist AUCH Wasserwirtschaft, Wasserbau an Gewässern gehört
aber auch zur Wasserwirtschaft.



___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [OSM-ja] 行政区画外の地域名について

[Satoshi IIDA]

いいだです。

基本的に、住所の体系にあるタグ（neighbourhoodやsuburbなど）は、
体系の中にない概念に対して使わないほうがよいかな、と思っています。

なので、
> 温泉地や発展その他の観光地などはホテルや従業員の寮、付随する商店街などもあり、人口的にはそれなりの規模
の場合は、人が住んでいるので、hamletのほうがよいのではないか、と思います。

> 旧大字については、多くの場合より大きな町名に吸収されて消滅した地名である事例
これについてもhamletにして、addressのリレーション体系には組み込まないほうがよいのじゃないかなぁ、と思ってます。
境界線がよほどはっきりしているもの以外については、ノードでplaceのオブジェクトを置けばよいかと。

かなり昔にジオ界隈で少し話題になった、
裏原宿はどこまで問題（「裏原宿」と呼ばれる地域はあるが、その境界についてはあいまい）に通じるものがありますね。



2018年8月31日(金) 13:03 RichyLatte :

>
> お返事ありがとうございます。
>
> 行政区分以外の地名については一般的にはOSMの本来のタグどおりに人口区分に
> 従ってタグ付けするという感じでしょうか？
>
> 観光地などにはlocalityが適切とのことでしたが
> 山中の高原などは確かに人口はほぼない場合が多いので適切かと思いますが
> 温泉地や発展その他の観光地などはホテルや従業員の寮、付随する商店街なども
> あり、人口的にはそれなりの規模になると思います。
> その場合、人口で区分するならsuburb当たりになるかと思いますが
> 住所に現れない観光地名の区分としてlocalityなのか、人口的な観点から
> localityということなのかどちらを基準としてつければよいのでしょうか？
>
> あと、旧大字については、多くの場合より大きな町名に吸収されて消滅した地名
> である事例が多いと思うので、neighbourhoodが適切なのは理解できました。
> これらの地名は上位のリレーションには組み込まないでノード配置だけにしてお
> いたほうがよいのでしょうか？
> それとも組み込むべきなのでしょうか？
> （観光地名についても組み込んだ方がよい？）
>
> 住所にない以上組み込まないと考えていましたが少し自信がありません。
>
> hamletかlocalityかについても人口区分での判断なのか、日本独自の区分として
> 同意した決め事としてのタグ付けなのか教えて頂けましたら、今後出くわしたと
> きにも迷わず付けられるかと思います。
>
> よろしくお願いします。
>
> >--
> >
> >Message: 1
> >Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 19:57:25 +0900
> >From: RichyLatte 
> >To: talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
> >Subject: [OSM-ja] 行政区画外の地域名について
> >Message-ID: <16ed440503c9966d1cd1...@gmail.com>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp
> >
> >
> >行政区画や住所に現れない地名について
> >地域の通称として広く使われている場所の名称を表現したい場合、
> >placeタグの区分をどうすればよいのか困っています。
> >
> >例
> >・温泉地や高原など、主に観光地に多いが、自治体の観光パンフレットなどでも
> >正式に使われており、現地に看板なども多く存在する。
> >・地域自治会や地域住民などで主に使われている、区分がはっきりしないがバス
> >停名や交差点名などにも用いられている地域名など
> >（GSI Standardの特定のズームのタイルには表示されている場合もあり、大字で
> >も小字でもなく住所にも一切表現されない。恐らく旧大字）
> >
> >OSM wikiや「OSMの地名・行政単位・郵便住所の対応」表なども確認しましたが
> >suburb〜quarter、neighbourhoodあたりが妥当な規模の場合が多いですが、どれ
> >を使ってよいのかよく分かりませんでした。
> >そのような地名は表現しなくてよい、と言ってしまえばそれまでではありますが
> >特に観光地などは、表示されていたほうが目的地を探す場合に非常に有効だと思
> >います。
> >どうかご教授ください。
> >
> >よろしくお願いします。
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> >Message: 2
> >Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 07:35:23 +0900
> >From: Satoshi IIDA 
> >To: OpenStreetMap Japanese talk 
> >Subject: Re: [OSM-ja] 行政区画外の地域名について
> >Message-ID:
> >   <
> cagexurak+urhymex8qpmh3xygyaps_gejgnmf+cpsc7imr9...@mail.gmail.com>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> >いいだです。
> >
> >確かに、住所の体系に入っていないけれども使われている地名はあって、僕も何度か
> >対面しました。
> >
> >以前にTwitterで話に上がったときには、
> >localityとhamletのどちらかで入力している、という話になり、
> >place=hamletのほうが適切ではないか、という結論になった気がします。
> >その後、Talk-jaで話したり、ドキュメンテーションに反映して無くてすみません。
> >
> >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Tag:place%3Dhamlet （居住しているひと
> >がいる）
> >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Tag:place%3Dlocality （居住しているひ
> >とがいない）
> >
> >と、いうわけで、これを機に、問題なければ place=hamletを割り当てるのがよいかな、
> >と思っています。
> >
> >過去の経緯として、既に place=hamlet で入力されているデータがあります。
> >これは、neighbourhoodがレンダリングされなかった（かつ、住所に関する体系立てが
> >なかった）時代に、
> >hamletで入力されていたことがある、というものです。
> >ほとんどの場合は、 neighbourhoodやquarterに切り替えればよいと思っています。
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >2018年8月31日(金) 7:10 RichyLatte :
> >
> >
> >--
> >Satoshi IIDA
> >mail: nyamp...@gmail.com
> >twitter: @nyampire
> >-- next part --
> >HTMLの添付ファイルを保管しました...
> >URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ja/attachments/20180831/
> >df042f62/attachment-0001.html>
> >
> >--
> >
> >Message: 3
> >Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 10:48:43 +0900
> >From: Satoshi IIDA 
> >To: OpenStreetMap Japanese talk 
> >Subject: Re: [OSM-ja] 行政区画外の地域名について
> >Message-ID:
> >   <
> cagexurdazlgm0nvm3g6_cgd_lcsey_gnjbg58v1fb9r0q1n...@mail.gmail.com>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> >いいだです。
> >あ、すみません、よく見たら、
> >
> >・温泉地や高原など、主に観光地に多いが、自治体の観光パンフレットなどでも
> >正式に使われており、現地に看板なども多く存在する。
> >-> こっちはたぶん localityのほうが適切
> >
> >・地域自治会や地域住民などで主に使われている、区分がはっきりしないがバス
> >停名や交差点名などにも用いられている地域名など
> >-> こっちはたぶん neighbourhoodのほうが適切
> >
> >というかんじですね。
> >
>
> ___
> Talk-ja mailing list
> Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja
>


-- 
Satoshi IIDA
mail: nyamp...@gmail.com
twitter: @nyampire
___
Talk-ja mailing list
Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja

Re: [Talk-de] Wege des WSV an den Kanälen / tagging

[Heiko Jacobs]

Am 27.08.2018 um 10:18 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:


Track
+ in den meisten Fällen Fahrradweg bzw. Fahrradstrasse, oder Wanderweg,


wie taggt man denn track und Fahrradweg auf demselben way?


Wer mal in Wald- oder Naturschutzgesetze (für Feldwege) schaut, wird
feststellen, dass auch Feld- und Waldwege für Fußgänger und Radfahrer
nur ein eingeschränktes Nutzungsrecht haben, insbesondere ist es stets
eine Benutzung auf eigene Gefahr, "typische Waldgefahren" wie rumliegende
Äste gehen zu Lasten der Radfahrer. Insofern ist das zum "Benutzung auf
eigene Gefahr" bei Wasserwirtschaftswegen sehr ähnlich.
Ohne abweichende Beschilderung läuft die Radroute eben über einen track.
Nix überraschendes in uneren Landen ...

Sollte dort ein blaues Radwegschild nach StVO stehen, ggfs. mit
"...wirtschaftlicher Verkehr frei" sieht die Verteilung der Rechte
m.E. anders aus: Der Radfahrer (und Fußgänger) wäre nicht mehr Gast,
sondern Hauptnutzer, der Wirtschaftsverkehr nur noch nachrangiger
Nutzer und m.E. auch eine andere Verkehrssicherungspflicht.
Das würde dann einen cycleway oder Artverwandtes rechtfertigen
mit motor_vehicle=passendes


Hier geht es um "Firmengelände"


Wenn man denn die WSV als "Firma" bezeichnen will - das wäre dann aber
auch beim Landwirt so (auch wenn die Firma einen Kleinbauern viel
kleiner ist als die WSV (wobei die Landwirtschaften durch
Industrialisierung und Fusionierung immer grösser werden).


das Betriebsgelände ist der Weg, analog wäre das beim Landwirt der > Feldweg. 
Diese sind aber meist öffentliches, unparzelliertes Land.


Eben! "Firmengelände" der Bauern etc.
Und nicht überall ist der Feld- oder Waldweg in öffentlichen Besitz,
viele sind auch in Privatbesitz.


Also so kompliziert finde ich die Sache nicht ...
Noch zwei meiner Antworten aus dem Forum:

Wirtschaftswege dienen bzgl. Motorfahrzeugen nur einem sehr
eingeschränkten Nutzerkreis, nämlich den Bewirtschaftenden, bei Feldern
den Landwirten, bei Wäldern den Forstwirten und Jägern, an Gewässern
und Brunnen eben den Wasserleuten.
Bzgl. nichtmotorisierten Verkehrsteilnehmern wird diesen nur ein
eingeschränktes Gastrecht mit Benutzung auf eigene Gefahr eingeräumt.

Nichtwirtschaftswege dienen dagegen auch Nichtwirtschaftenden als
Fahrweg, bei "Anlieger frei" auch der Tante des Bauern, die auf
Kaffeebesuch kommt, dem Postboten, Hafennutzer, ... Ohne "Anlieger frei"
jedem x-beliebigen Menschen, also Erholungssuchende.
Verkehrssicherungspflichten gelten vollumfänglich, Nichtmotorisierte
haben nicht nur ein eingeschränktes Gastrecht auf den Wegen.


Wirtschaftswege und Nichtwirtschaftswege werden auf vielen Karten
anders gerendert, ohne dass man Details beim Anschauen aufgedrängt bekommt.
Schon auf flüchtigem Blick sollte ich ungefähr rausbekommen können,
ob ich da lang darf oder nicht ... Der Haupttag sollte also stimmig
sein und nicht durch 1024 Zusatztags umgedreht werden.


___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-cz] GPS-presnost

[<0174]

Díky za upřesnění, nevěděl jsem, že ty stanice máme i v ČR. Něco podobného
jako DGPS Garmin uměl/umí, akorát jen v Severní Americe:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Area_Augmentation_System

Nicméně pro naše potřeby si myslím, že to průměrování dává slušné výsledky,
zejména v porovnání z nezprůměrovanými body v těžkém terénu.

Vojta

Dne 31. srpna 2018 10:46 Jan Macura  napsal(a):

> Ahoj,
>
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 09:55,  wrote:
>
>> Presnost geodetickych GPS neni v prumerovani (i kdyz ano, udela se treba
>> deset mereni za deset sekund a vysledek se ulozi), ale v pouziti korekci,
>> viz
>>
>> https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diferenci%C3%A1ln%C3%AD_GPS#
>> Princip_a_vlastnosti
>>
>
> To je za (a). Za (b) ještě v použití fázových měření namísto kódových dat.
>
> H.
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] GPS-presnost

[Jan Macura]

Ahoj,

On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 09:55,  wrote:

> Presnost geodetickych GPS neni v prumerovani (i kdyz ano, udela se treba
> deset mereni za deset sekund a vysledek se ulozi), ale v pouziti korekci,
> viz
>
>
> https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diferenci%C3%A1ln%C3%AD_GPS#Princip_a_vlastnosti
>

To je za (a). Za (b) ještě v použití fázových měření namísto kódových dat.

H.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-us] NYC Name Vandalism

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 30.08.2018 22:43, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> We can only speculate about the motives here

Ah, just a security researcher, I guess this makes it ok then?

https://reddit.com/r/openstreetmap/comments/9brqx4/this_is_medwedianpresident1_talking_what_i_did/

> frankly my money is on
> "attention seeking teenager" 

Or maybe it is the same guy who's been asked to be more mature here?

https://www.reddit.com/r/civclassics/comments/6rxu7p/before_you_leave_medwedianpresident_a_couple/

And what is this:

https://archive.is/4NzTp

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-it] dataset MISE distributori

[Andrea Musuruane]

Ciao,

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 10:24 PM Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> Ho paura che tutto questo import, con tutta la buona volontà degli autori,
> non è andato bene. E se sono cosi tanti gli errori, chi mi dice che i dati
> che ci interessano veramente, cioè il numero identificativo è di una
> qualità più alta?
>

Per quanto ho avuto modo di verificare nelle mie zone, indubbiamente sì.

Purtroppo non ci sono abbastanza mapper per tenere aggiornate tutte le
amenity - specialmente quelle che cambiano più di frequente - e tra queste
le stazioni di rifornimento.

Tra l'altro, con una query overpass, potete trovare i distributori che non
sono nel database del MISE (non hanno il tag ref:mise). In OSM ho trovato
impianti chiusi e smantellati da anni.

Se volete controllare le vostre zone, la query è la seguente (dovete
cambiare ovviamente area di ricerca):
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/BwB

Ciao,

Andrea
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] PhotoDB

[Jiří Sedláček]

Nebo to aspoň nahrávat pod kompatibilní licencí, aby to případně šlo nahrát
i na commons, ideálně hromadně.

J.

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:09 AM Jan Macura  wrote:

> Ahoj,
>
> pro fotky nádražních budov, vysílačů i mostů je jistě místo na Commons
>  ;-)
> Nepřijde mi efektivní duplikovat ty fotografie ve PhotoDB, pokud se
> nenajde nějaká přidaná hodnota.
>
> H.
>
>
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 11:02, Mikoláš Štrajt  wrote:
>
>> Zdar,
>> na dovolené jsem pilně fotil rozcestníky (a taky mosty, vysílače na
>> kopcích, nádražní budovy a vůbec všechno okolo).
>>
>> Včera večer jsem jeden rozcestník zkoušel nahrát, ale nejsem si úplně
>> jistej, zda jsem to udělal dobře.
>>
>> Proto se ptám: Kde je nějaká up-to date dokumentace PhotoDB? (Jako co
>> můžu nahrávat, jak mám správně spárovat rozcestník v OSM a ve PhotoDB...)
>>
>> Wiki stránka o sobě hrdě tvrdí, že je zastaralá...
>>
>> Mimochodem jak to vypadá s vývojem PhotoDB2? Používá se už někde?
>>
>> --
>> Severák
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-cz mailing list
>> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>


-- 
S pozdravem,
Jirka Sedláček
---
jirisedla...@gmail.com
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-it] Frazioni con civici ripetuti

[EneaSuper]

sabas88 wrote
> Per la strada si potrebbe spezzare e scrivere un alt_name con Via X di Y
> dove Y è la frazione.

Questa formula mi piace!


dieterdreist wrote
> Si potrebbero mappare come entità "place", che non hanno requisiti del
> tipo
> amministrativo politico. Per il perimetro si potrebbe prendere il confine
> del centro abitato.

Ottima idea 


dieterdreist wrote
> Le case sparse però fanno sempre riferimento alla frazione per quanto
> riguarda l'indirizzo (ad esempio "Via Antonio Gramsci, Mancasale, Reggio
> Emilia, (RE)", dove "Mancasale" è la frazione) per cui secondo me è meglio
> comunque indicare la frazione nel tag addr:hamlet sull'indirizzo piuttosto
> che utilizzare solo l'area della frazione.

Credo proprio che il tag citato alla fine sia più che giusto, in quanto le
case sparse non sono comprese nell'area urbana.



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-transit] New wiki article about network-relations: please review section about public transport

[User 30303020]

Dear subscribers,
   quite recently a new wiki article about network-relations was created [1]. 
It features a section about network-relaitons in public transport mapping. 
Please review this section as there may be more approaches to this topic than 
mentioned in the article. Just to clarify the notion of a network-relation, I 
copied the definition here:   _A network-relation groups features as members of 
a network, marks them as being part of a certain network and represents this 
network itself. A route-relation with the network=* tag is therefore not a 
network-relation._Thanks and kind regards
U30303020    Link: [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:network 
  

-
FreeMail powered by mail.de - MEHR SICHERHEIT, SERIOSITÄT UND KOMFORT
___
Talk-transit mailing list
Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit

Re: [Talk-cz] PhotoDB

[Jan Macura]

Ahoj,

pro fotky nádražních budov, vysílačů i mostů je jistě místo na Commons
 ;-)
Nepřijde mi efektivní duplikovat ty fotografie ve PhotoDB, pokud se nenajde
nějaká přidaná hodnota.

H.


On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 at 11:02, Mikoláš Štrajt  wrote:

> Zdar,
> na dovolené jsem pilně fotil rozcestníky (a taky mosty, vysílače na
> kopcích, nádražní budovy a vůbec všechno okolo).
>
> Včera večer jsem jeden rozcestník zkoušel nahrát, ale nejsem si úplně
> jistej, zda jsem to udělal dobře.
>
> Proto se ptám: Kde je nějaká up-to date dokumentace PhotoDB? (Jako co můžu
> nahrávat, jak mám správně spárovat rozcestník v OSM a ve PhotoDB...)
>
> Wiki stránka o sobě hrdě tvrdí, že je zastaralá...
>
> Mimochodem jak to vypadá s vývojem PhotoDB2? Používá se už někde?
>
> --
> Severák
>
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-cz] maperská minirecenze MI 8

[Ha Noj]

> Nezlepší se tím totiž ani chod hodin
*** Co to je chod hodin? Čas je přeci součástí výpočtu polohy, poroto je
potřeba min. 4 družice pro 3D.
https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glob%C3%A1ln%C3%AD_dru%C5%BEicov%C3%BD_polohov%C3%BD_syst%C3%A9m#K%C3%B3dov%C3%A1

hanoj
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-au] PSMA Administrative Boundaries

[Warin]

On 31/08/18 17:20, Andrew Davidson wrote:

On 31/8/18 16:23, Andrew Harvey wrote:
(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data 
for 9

and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a separate discussion but
perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)


Level 9 appears to have been intended for non-ABS derived suburbs and 
level 10 for ABS. What's happened is 10 has been used for suburbs.


Do we have any data for bounded localities smaller than suburbs? I 
don't know of any jurisdiction that defines sub-suburb areas, so I 
don't see the point of moving away from 10.


Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included 
in OSM)

State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries


Agree.


admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few 
minor
differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost 
non-existent (ACT
doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). 


Given that we have previously only had data for SA/Vic/NSW any other 
data would have come from sources we were not allowed to use.



admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here


That's more a problem with the rather vague definition of what level 7 
is supposed to be.


Nicaragua is using it for 'Indigenous territories'. Possibly 'we' could 
do the same?



suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a
number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrant 
investigation

and correction.


That's a bit of understatement for Vic. I checked the Vicmap suburbs 
with what's in OSM and it's not good. Currently we have ~1600 suburbs 
in OSM but there are ~3000 suburbs in Vicmaps/PSMA. It would appear 
that somewhere between ABS2011 and ABS2016 the number of Victorian 
suburbs almost doubled.


 So I guess the question is should we 


I know that some people don't like having the admin boundaries in OSM. 
I find that having the suburb/locality boundaries is useful 
(downloading data by area and geo-referencing in Nominatim). The LGA 
boundaries less so as most people don't really think very much about 
their local council and it's odd to see it appear in an address for 
example. But that said if you do the suburbs you might as well do the 
LGAs.


My 'problems' with the admin boundaries are;
 where they use another way that is also a road/river. And then some 
mapper comes along and improves the road/river .. but buggers up the 
admin boundary.
then I come along and 'fix it' using the LPI Base map .. and put that 
source on the way.


2 things on my wish list ;
that admin boundaries don't use other 'close enough' ways already in 
OSM. This would reduce the number of times that the relationships are 
broken.
that admin boundaries have a source tag on there ways to say what the 
source is. This means when I come along and fix a broken one my source 
statement will not be confusing when looking at  the relationship as 
that  relationship will have no source tag.




how should we do that. 


Import.

Import.


Is anyone interested in working on this? 


I am.

Not me.


If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process 
(discuss first,

identify the process and then execute).


You're preaching to the choir here. Amen to that.




___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[OSM-talk-fr] Comment tagger une passe, le passage entre le lagon et la mer à travers la barrière de corail?

[Nicolas Toublanc]

Bonjour,

Tout est dans le titre, savez-vous comment tagger une passe, le passage
entre le lagon et la mer à travers la barrière de corail?

En plus d'être des points d'entrée dans le lagon pour la navigation, ce
sont aussi d'excellent sites de plongée, et ont donc généralement un nom.

A Mayotte, l'une des passes (la passe en S
) est taggée comme
un point, avec le tag natural=bay, mais je ne sais pas si c'est bien adapté.

Ma question concerne les 2 aspects, géométrie et tag.

*## Quel tag?*

Concernant le tag, natural=bay
 ne me parait pas
forcément approprié, mais je ne vois pas ce que je pourrais mettre à la
place?

En anglais, il semble que l'on puisse dire "pass" ou "passe", mais cet
article  fait pointer le mot passe
vers strait  (détroit
), qui semble correspondre
d'après la définition:

*"A strait is a naturally formed, narrow, typically navigable
>  waterway that connects two larger
> bodies of water".*
>


La description du tag natural=strait
 et l'exemple
cité du Détroit de Matotchkine
 semble
bien coller au besoin, bien que ce ne soit pas tout à fait la même chose.

Alors, faut-il quand même utiliser ce tag, seul ou avec un complement genre
natural:strait=pass ou bien créer un tag spécifique?

*## Quel géométrie*

Concernant la géométrie, faut-il représenter un point au centre de la
passe, une ligne (comme pour une rivière) ou bien un polygone délimitant
plus précisément le passage?

Sur la page wiki de natural=strait
, on répond à ma
question, on peut utiliser les 3 représentations, selon ce qui est le plus
adapté.

J'ai l'impression que si elle est bien délimitée, le polygone est
préférable car plus précis.

Tout avis ou commentaire est le bienvenu, merci d'avance!

-- 
Nicolas Toublanc
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [talk-au] PSMA Administrative Boundaries

[Andrew Davidson]

On 31/8/18 16:23, Andrew Harvey wrote:

(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9
and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a separate discussion but
perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)


Level 9 appears to have been intended for non-ABS derived suburbs and 
level 10 for ABS. What's happened is 10 has been used for suburbs.


Do we have any data for bounded localities smaller than suburbs? I don't 
know of any jurisdiction that defines sub-suburb areas, so I don't see 
the point of moving away from 10.



Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries


Agree.


admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor
differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT
doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). 


Given that we have previously only had data for SA/Vic/NSW any other 
data would have come from sources we were not allowed to use.



admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here


That's more a problem with the rather vague definition of what level 7 
is supposed to be.



suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a
number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrant investigation
and correction.


That's a bit of understatement for Vic. I checked the Vicmap suburbs 
with what's in OSM and it's not good. Currently we have ~1600 suburbs in 
OSM but there are ~3000 suburbs in Vicmaps/PSMA. It would appear that 
somewhere between ABS2011 and ABS2016 the number of Victorian suburbs 
almost doubled.


 So I guess the question is should we 


I know that some people don't like having the admin boundaries in OSM. I 
find that having the suburb/locality boundaries is useful (downloading 
data by area and geo-referencing in Nominatim). The LGA boundaries less 
so as most people don't really think very much about their local council 
and it's odd to see it appear in an address for example. But that said 
if you do the suburbs you might as well do the LGAs.


how should we do that. 


Import.

Is anyone interested in working on this? 


I am.


If people are, I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss 
first,
identify the process and then execute).


You're preaching to the choir here. Amen to that.

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Nom des routes

[Jérôme Seigneuret]

E pour exploitation ne pose pas de problème car E pour les autoroutes
européennes passe sur une autre clé *int_ref*


Le jeu. 30 août 2018 à 23:31, Philippe Verdy  a écrit :

> Tu as oublié les routes métropolitaines (M) qui commencent à apparaître
> dans certains départements où la métropole a décidé de prendre à sa charge
> et gérer une partie du réseau intercommunal, et en a reçu la compétence du
> département et en accord avec ses communes membres (certaines
> métropolitaines peuvent aussi inclure des segments cédés des réseaux
> communaux pour l'intérêt communautaire).
>
> Il y a aussi les routes territoriales (T) en Corse et en outre-mer.
>
>
> Le jeu. 30 août 2018 à 23:17, Gwenaël Jouvin 
> a écrit :
>
>> Une petite remarque sur le format de la nomenclature qui apparaît dans
>> les cartouches routiers : je suis bien de ton avis de respecter celle
>> communément admise, présente sur le terrain et illustrée en annexe 24 de la
>> 5e partie de l’IISR [1], soit :
>> — A pour les autoroutes (blanc sur rouge) ;
>> — N pour les nationales (idem) ;
>> — D pour les départementales (noir sur jaune) ;
>> — C pour les voies communales (noir sur blanc) ;
>> — R pour les chemins ruraux (idem);
>> — F pour les routes forestières (blanc sur vert).
>>
>> On peut y ajouter 2 catégories :
>> — E pour les itinéraires européens, nomenclature parallèle que l’on voit
>> sur certaines autoroutes et peut-être ailleurs (blanc sur vert) ;
>> — M, qui n’a pas l’air vraiment réglementaire mais fait l’objet d’une
>> expérimentation [2], que l’on peut voir à Nice, pour « route métropolitaine
>> » (blanc sur cyan).
>>
>>
>> C’est pour cela que sur les voies communales & chemins ruraux, je crois
>> qu’il vaut mieux éviter les usages « VC » et « CR » tout comme on
>> n’utilisera pas « RN » ni « RD » voire « CD ».
>> Par contre, puisqu’il faut toujours une exception, je pense que l’on peut
>> utiliser « CE » pour les chemins d’exploitation puisque d’une part ils ne
>> semblent pas concernés par la réglementation sur la signalisation et qu’il
>> ne faudrait pas les désigner comme des routes européennes.
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> http://www.equipementsdelaroute.equipement.gouv.fr/les-versions-actualisees-a-fevrier-2016-de-l-a442.html
>> [2]
>> http://www.securite-routiere.gouv.fr/la-securite-routiere/actualites/une-nouvelle-signaletique-routiere-pour-les-metropoles-la-signalisation-s-adapte-aux-evolutions-du-reseau-routier
>>
>>
>> Le 30/08/2018 à 15:40, Jérôme Seigneuret a écrit :
>> > […]
>> >> Le cas du voie communale n°12 en ref = c12 ok le nom surement pas.
>> C'est le cas mentionné ci-dessus.
>> > pour les ref faut voir pour les autres type de voies avec des ref :
>> *R*ural, *E*xploitation, *F*orestière, (c'est juste ce que j'ai en tête)
>> *Voie *rentre -il en conflit avec les *Route *ou *Chemin* dans la
>> numérotation?
>> >
>> > Normalement ces noms sont remontés dans le cadastre mais comme la
>> gestion est communale, elle doit se trouvé dans les POS , CC et PLU
>> > qui plus est les PLUI n'ont il pas changer la numérotation des voies vu
>> que cela englobe l'ensemble de L'EPCI???
>> >
>> > Bref le cadastre pour les référence oui mais pour du old_ref...
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-fr mailing list
>> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>


-- 
Cordialement,
Jérôme Seigneuret
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Lieux-dits

[Jérôme Seigneuret]

Comme tu le mentionne, certains lieudit sont les noms d'éléments physique
déjà mentionné. Et là on revient à faire un peu d'historique pour savoir
qui a été nommé en premier et quel est devenu l'usage courant... C'est le
jeu deux l'oeuf et la poule.

C'est pour cela qu'on à des résidence portant des noms de lieudit. Le lieu
dit étant déjà nommé pour l'agriculture, l'exploitation des bois, la
morphologique de lieu, les événements ayant pu s'y passer...

En fait c'est plus compliqué que le simple fait de dire: *si c'est pas une
ville c'est un lieudit*. Sur Montpellier on a même des niveaux
administratifs portant le même nom Prés d'Arènes
nv 10
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1975917#map=14/43.5897/3.8882
nv 11
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1977726#map=15/43.5861/3.8826

C'est dans le cadastre mais pas des lieudits . Si je ne me trompe pas c'est
un lieu isolé ou non habité. Donc les nom des lieudit non habité ou isolé
peuvent être en doublon et entrer en conflit avec l'affichage carto pour
les éléments naturels ou occupation des sols (comme les landuse=farmyard)




Le jeu. 30 août 2018 à 11:40, Rpnpif  a écrit :

> Le 28 août 2018, Gwenaël Jouvin a écrit :
>
> > « Le panneau D29 est utilisé pour signaler les hameaux, les fermes, les
> lieux-dits isolés […] »
>
>
> À mon avis, dans OSM pour la France au moins, il faut éviter de nommer
> les cours de ferme par le nom du lieu-dit parce que de plus en plus de
> fermes ont un nom du type « GAEC des roses » ou bien « Ferme de la
> source ». Parfois ce nom n'est pas apparent.
>
> Même si les noms du lieu-dit et celui de la ferme sont identiques, je
> suis d'avis qu'il faut mettre le nom de la structure sur
> landuse=farmyard (en ajoutant facultativement « ferme de ... » ou
> autre) et aussi sur place=isolated_dwelling (ou place=hamlet si plus de
> deux habitations) sur un point ou une surface.
>
> C'est la même logique qu'en ville où on repère et nomme une
> place=square et le ou les commerces qu'elle contient.
>
> L'intérêt est que, quand la ferme change de nom (changement de
> GAEC, etc.), on conserve bien le nom du lieu-dit.
>
> C'est un cas assez fréquent en rural.
>
> Géoportail affecte parfois mais pas toujours le nom du lieu-dit à la
> route arrivant à la ferme. Même si c'est pratique surtout pour la
> Poste, ce n'est pas aussi précis à mon avis. Je ne sais pas si c'est
> pertinent sur OSM.
>
> --
> Alain Rpnpif
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>


-- 
Cordialement,
Jérôme Seigneuret
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [talk-au] PSMA Administrative Boundaries

[Phil Wyatt]

Hi Andrew,

I am happy to help out BUT, I have never done any imports previously so it will 
be a cautious approach from me. My main interest is in Tasmania.


Cheers - Phil, 
On the road with his iPad 

> On 31 Aug 2018, at 4:23 pm, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> 
> The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages data.gov.au 
> have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA Administrative 
> Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].
> 
> Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great encouragement 
> from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative Boundaries] data 
> more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing global open data 
> efforts."
> 
> Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able to 
> comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM data 
> from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative 
> boundaries[4]:
> 
> osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=administrative 
> -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf
> 
> Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:
> 
> ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf
> 
> The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:
> 
> 3 n/a
> 4 State or Territory
> 5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
> 6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
> 7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, 
> Greater Melbourne, etc.)
> 8 Postcode
> 9 Suburb and Locality
> 10 Suburb and Locality
> 
> (not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9 
> and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but perhaps 
> they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)
> 
> PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built 
> from [8])
> 
> Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
> State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
> State Boundaries
> Local Government Areas
> Suburbs / Localities
> Town Points
> Wards
> 
> admin_level 6 LGAs
> It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor 
> differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT 
> doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). SA is missing a 
> few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.
> 
> admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here
> 
> suburbs/localities
> NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a number 
> of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation and 
> correction.
> 
> ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities 
> there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts 
> have a slightly different name format.
> 
> All other states are empty in OSM.
> 
> Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC (VicMap), 
> NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au) already.
> 
> So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing wise 
> we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how should 
> we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are, I think 
> it should go through the proper import process (discuss first, identify the 
> process and then execute).
> 
> [1] https://data.gov.au/dataset/psma-administrative-boundaries
> [2] 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Department_of_Industry_Innovation_and_Science_ODbl_permission_Administrative_Boundaries.pdf
> [3] http://download.openstreetmap.fr/extracts/oceania/
> [4] https://osmcode.org/osmium-tool/manual.html#filtering-by-tags
> [5] 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries
> [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_Victoria
> [7] https://tianjara.net/data/psma-admin-bdys/
> [8] https://github.com/andrewharvey/psma-admin-bdys-data
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] PSMA Administrative Boundaries

[Ewen Hill]

Andrew,
   Thank you for all the hard work and achieving this key element. I would
like to look at all level numbers to standardise these and to go forward.
Also happy to have a dabble of the import process and associated doco.

I would like to aski if it is possible to
1. add the ability to have, possibly at [*5*], the Aboriginal nations e.g.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_Victoria_Aboriginal_tribes_(colourmap).jpg
and
2. swap  *6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council) *and *7 District or
Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney, Greater
Melbourne, etc.) *as normally these areas are large than a singular LGA.

Ewen



On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 16:25, Andrew Harvey 
wrote:

> The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages
> data.gov.au have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA
> Administrative Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].
>
> Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great
> encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative
> Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing
> global open data efforts."
>
> Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able
> to comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM
> data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative
> boundaries[4]:
>
> osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf
> nwr/boundary=administrative -o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf
>
> Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:
>
> ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf
>
> The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:
>
> 3 n/a
> 4 State or Territory
> 5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
> 6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
> 7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney,
> Greater Melbourne, etc.)
> 8 Postcode
> 9 Suburb and Locality
> 10 Suburb and Locality
>
> (not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for
> 9 and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but
> perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)
>
> PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built
> from [8])
>
> Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
> State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
> State Boundaries
> Local Government Areas
> Suburbs / Localities
> Town Points
> Wards
>
> admin_level 6 LGAs
> It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few
> minor differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost
> non-existent (ACT doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the
> Territory). SA is missing a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.
>
> admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here
>
> suburbs/localities
> NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a
> number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation
> and correction.
>
> ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities
> there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts
> have a slightly different name format.
>
> All other states are empty in OSM.
>
> Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC
> (VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au)
> already.
>
> So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing
> wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how
> should we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are,
> I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first,
> identify the process and then execute).
>
> [1] https://data.gov.au/dataset/psma-administrative-boundaries
> [2]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Department_of_Industry_Innovation_and_Science_ODbl_permission_Administrative_Boundaries.pdf
> [3] http://download.openstreetmap.fr/extracts/oceania/
> [4] https://osmcode.org/osmium-tool/manual.html#filtering-by-tags
> [5]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries
> [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_Victoria
> [7] https://tianjara.net/data/psma-admin-bdys/
> [8] https://github.com/andrewharvey/psma-admin-bdys-data
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>


-- 
Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
Internet Development Australia
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-es] [geoinquietos-es] Reunión/Actividad/es comunidad OSM España en Geocamp ES (MAD

[Luis García Castro]

Yo intentaré asistir, allí estaré salvo sorpresa :-)

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 6:43 PM Miguel Sevilla-Callejo 
wrote:

> Hola,
>
> Vuelvo a la carga para concretar el tema de realizar una reunión de la
> comunidad española de OSM aprovechando la celebración de la Geocamp 2018
> que se llevará a cabo en Madrid el 20 y posiblemente también el 21 de
> Octubre.
>
> Os paso la web del evento y en breve os pondré la dirección del meetup
> para apuntarse: http://2018.geocamp.es/
>
> Me he tomado la libertad de ir moviendo este tema dentr ode la Geocamp
> pero cualquier ayuda será bienvenida. Lo estamos moviendo por el GitHub en
> esta dirección: https://github.com/geocamp-es/2018/issues/2
>
> Sería bueno ir diciendo quién va a venir... ¿cuento con los madrileños al
> menos?
>
> Volveré a insistir
>
> Un saludo
>
> M
>
> --
> *Miguel Sevilla-Callejo*
> Doctor en Geografía
>
>
> On Fri, 18 May 2018 at 16:59, Santiago Crespo 
> wrote:
>
>> Gracias Miguel, me parece una iniciativa muy buena.
>>
>> Nos vemos en octubre entonces, o cuando sea la Geocamp.
>>
>> Saludos,
>> Santiago Crespo
>>
>> On 05/18/2018 02:08 PM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>> > Ojo que la fecha y lugar no están cerrados, vamos que seguro no va a
>> ser en
>> > MediaLab (ni Google Campus)
>> >
>> > https://github.com/geocamp-es/2018/issues/1
>> >
>> > En cuanto tengamos lugar y fecha os avisamos
>> > On Fri, 18 May 2018 at 10:31, Miguel Sevilla-Callejo <
>> msevill...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hola (copio a listas de OSM/Talk-es y a geoinquietos),
>> >
>> >> A la vista de algunos desencuentros y malentendidos uqe ha habido
>> dentro
>> > de la comunidad de OSM España y ante la necesidad acuciante de vernos
>> las
>> > caras de una vez para relanzar algunos aspectos organizativos de la
>> propia
>> > comunidad, se me ocurrió que podríamos aprovechar para vernos en la
>> > "desconferencia" de la Geocamp-ES [1] que se celebrará en Madrid
>> (MediaLab
>> > Prado) los pŕoximos 20 y 21 de octubre, que organiza Geoinquietos
>> Madrid y
>> > en la que asistiremos personas doblemente implicados en este movimiento
>> > "geo" y en la comunidad OSM.
>> >
>> >> Se ha creado un github para la organización del evento y he tenido la
>> > osadía de abrir un "issue" sobre el tema de alguna actividad/reunión/lo
>> que
>> > se tercie de la comunidad OMS:
>> >
>> >> https://github.com/geocamp-es/2018/issues/2
>> >
>> >> Como veréis solo está la idea, pero la cosa es, seǵun las ganas, hacer
>> > una pequeña reunión, algún taller o lo que se tercie, en la línea de la
>> > geocamp.
>> >
>> >> ¿Cómo lo veis? ¿Nos vemos en octubre en Madrid? A buen seguro nos viene
>> > bien vernos las caras, desvirtualizarnos y compartir más que
>> conversaciones
>> > de mensajería instantánea o correos electrónicos.
>> >
>> >> Un saludo
>> >
>> >> Miguel
>> >
>> >
>> >> [1] De la web http://2013.geocamp.es/ --> Un Geocamp es una
>> > geo-desconferencia, un evento en el que todos los participantes toman un
>> > papel más activo dentro de la creación del evento. Tiene su origen en el
>> > concepto Barcamp. Es un día para el intercambio de experiencias,
>> > conocimientos y valores en torno a todo aquello que tenga que ver con lo
>> > GEO y no tan GEO
>> >
>> >> --
>> >> Miguel Sevilla-Callejo
>> >> Doctor en Geografía
>> >> ___
>> >> geoinquietos-es mailing list
>> >> geoinquietos...@lists.osgeo.org
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoinquietos-es
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-es mailing list
>> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>


-- 

Luis GC
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-it] dataset MISE distributori

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Il 30 ago 2018 10:24 PM, "Volker Schmidt"  ha scritto:




> Poi mi sfugge una cosa fondamentale: se una discrepanza merita un fixme,
quale è la differenza fra brand e name? Devono o non devono essere
identici? Se devono essere identici, perché due tag per la stessa cosa?


Ho appena visto un brand=IP name=IPmatic

> Perché lo spelling del brand è "Total Erg" e non "TotalErg" come è
> scritto in grande lettere sul posto.
>
>> Perchè il gestore scrive a volte con lo spazio, a volte senza, come il
> mappatore (per quello che ho visto in giro)
>

Non può essere cosi. Scommetto che non esiste una sola pompa con scritta
"Total Erg" [3a]. I dati MISE semplicemente non sono corrette.
Propongo di fare una modifica automatica "Total Erg" > "TotalErg".

In realtà la scritta sulle stazioni è in maiuscoli TOTALERG [4]  - vedi
anche, per divertimento:: [5] e [6] (quest'ultimo ovviamente riflette
l'importazione)


> Secondo Wkipedia la ditta "TotalErg SPA" non esiste più, è stata
acquistata dalla Anonima petroli italiana nel gennaio di quest'anno. Quindi
il valore del tag operator non è più valido (per 2600 benzinai in Italia)

> +1
> in ogni caso, dal 10 gennaio 2018 (data di cessazione societaria) a pochi
> giorni prima dell'import ne sono stati modificati solo 52 [2] e, presi
> alcuni a caso, la modifica non ha riguardato  nome o brand. L'ìimport ha
> introdotto quindi errori IMHO utli ad un eventale mass editing
> TotalErg->Api. Al 28 agosto il MISE continua a pubblicare TotalErg, forse
> per dimenticanza (magari perchè il form che sottopone ai gestori non è
> stato aggiornato) o perchè il registro imprese non ha aggiornato.
>

Questo conferma che abbiamo importato dati che erano già sbagliati alla
fonte (Mise)


Perché impegnarsi a togliere lo spazio se stanno sostituendo i cartelloni
con quelli senza ""totalerg" ne' "total erg"?


Un altro, minore problema sono la presenza di tag source=x che possono
contenere informazione, ma sono sicurmane non più corrette dopo questo
import.


Qualsiasi source preesistente non credo rifletta più il dato.


Ho paura che tutto questo import, con tutta la buona volontà degli autori,
non è andato bene. E se sono cosi tanti gli errori, chi mi dice che i dati
che ci interessano veramente, cioè il numero identificativo è di una
qualità più alta?

A che numero identificativo ti riferisci? Se intendi ref:mise, a quale
altro ref lo compari?
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] GB does not include Northern Ireland

[Andrew Hain]

Although Dave’s edits left out Northern Ireland, 
(https://www.mail-archive.com/talk-gb@openstreetmap.org/msg16162.html) the 
question of whether similar edits should take place there was left open.

--
Andrew

From: Brian Prangle 
Sent: 29 August 2018 13:20
To: Dave F; Talk GB; Killyfole and District Development Association
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] GB does not include Northern Ireland

 I thought that you said  c roads would remain in NI but judging by Clive's 
reaction I thought something must have changed. He's obviously not convinced 
that c roads are going to remain in NI so perhaps you should  make it even more 
abundantly and explicitly clear that this is the case and have it documented 
clearly in all the right places. Can I suggest that perhaps you might also 
benefit from your own advice when making  future country-wide automatic edits

Regards

Brian

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 21:42, Dave F 
mailto:davefoxfa...@btinternet.com>> wrote:


On 28/08/2018 20:24, Brian Prangle wrote:
>  I suggest at the very least that the change is reverted for NI.
>

I wish people would read before putting their hands anywhere near a
keyboard.

DaveF

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[talk-au] PSMA Administrative Boundaries

[Andrew Harvey]

The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science which manages data.gov.au
have just completed the OSMF CC BY waiver allowing the PSMA Administrative
Boundaries[1] to be used within OpenStreetMap[2].

Quoting their email, "The Australian Government received great
encouragement from PSMA Australia Limited to make the AB [Administrative
Boundaries] data more accessible. Many thanks to OSM for your ongoing
global open data efforts."

Others more active in working with admin boundaries in OSM might be able to
comment further on my analysis, but I've taken a look at the current OSM
data from a planet extract[3], using osmium tool to extract administrative
boundaries[4]:

osmium tags-filter australia-latest.osm.pbf nwr/boundary=administrative
-o osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

Then converted to GeoPackage to open in QGIS to compare to PSMA boundaries:

ogr2ogr -f GPKG osm-admin-boundaries.gpkg osm-admin-boundaries.osm.pbf

The admin_level values for Australia are defined as[5]:

3 n/a
4 State or Territory
5 n/a (but used in Victoria for regions[6])
6 Local Government Area (eg Shire/Council)
7 District or Region (e.g Perthshire, Fitzroy, Canning, Greater Sydney,
Greater Melbourne, etc.)
8 Postcode
9 Suburb and Locality
10 Suburb and Locality

(not sure why the split across 9 and 10...? but it looks like no data for 9
and all suburb/localities are marked as 10, a seperate discussion but
perhaps they should be 9 and smaller neighbourhoods be in 10?)

PSMA Admin Boundaries provide (for Australia wide Shapefiles see [7] built
from [8])

Commonwealth Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Electoral Boundaries (I don't think should be included in OSM)
State Boundaries
Local Government Areas
Suburbs / Localities
Town Points
Wards

admin_level 6 LGAs
It looks like NSW, VIC have complete LGA coverage already aside a few minor
differences, but NT is patchy and TAS, QLD, WA are almost non-existent (ACT
doesn't really have LGAs it's all managed by the Territory). SA is missing
a few LGAs which exist in the PSMA data.

admin_level 7 is a mixed bag, but the PSMA data won't help here

suburbs/localities
NSW, VIC, SA all have pretty much complete data in OSM but there are a
number of differences with the PSMA data which should warrent investigation
and correction.

ACT I think has good existing data (in the PSMA data in suburb/localities
there are both levels, eg. Canberra Centre and Parkes), but the districts
have a slightly different name format.

All other states are empty in OSM.

Keeping in mind that we have state data for admin boundaries in VIC
(VicMap), NSW (Spatial Services), ACT (ACTmapi) and SA (data.sa.gov.au)
already.

So there does appear to be a lot of data missing in OSM, which licensing
wise we could bring in to OSM. So I guess the question is should we and how
should we do that. Is anyone interested in working on this? If people are,
I think it should go through the proper import process (discuss first,
identify the process and then execute).

[1] https://data.gov.au/dataset/psma-administrative-boundaries
[2]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Department_of_Industry_Innovation_and_Science_ODbl_permission_Administrative_Boundaries.pdf
[3] http://download.openstreetmap.fr/extracts/oceania/
[4] https://osmcode.org/osmium-tool/manual.html#filtering-by-tags
[5]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_Victoria
[7] https://tianjara.net/data/psma-admin-bdys/
[8] https://github.com/andrewharvey/psma-admin-bdys-data
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au